»■».».»»  »  »  »  »  » 

Please 

handle  this  volume 

with  care. 

The  University  of  Connecticut 
Libraries,  Storrs 


t  j 


r 


9153  00068873  1 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 

in  2009  with  funding  from 

Boston  Library  Consortium  Member  Libraries 


http://www.archive.org/details/englishdominican01jarr 


THE  ENGLISH 
DOMINICANS 


NIHIL  OBSTAT 

Fr.  Vincent  McNabb,  O.P. 
Fr.  Robert  Bracey,  O.P. 

4  August  1920. 

NIHIL  OBSTAT 

C.  Schut,  D.D.,  Censor  Depvtatvs. 

IMPRIMATVR 
Edm.  Can.  Svrmont,  Vicarivs  Generalis. 

Westmonasterii,  die  14JANVAR11  1921. 


PRINTED     IN     ENGLAND 
AT  THE  CHISW1CK  PRESS 


nnuanliruitaiuamuuiHHcp 
ttfutotatn  aim:  imioiuauuo  mr 


JOHN  SIFREWAS,  O.P.  (about  a.d.    1400),  OFFERING   HIS  ILLU 
MINATED  LECTIONARYTO   LORD  LOVEL  OF  TICHMARSH 

By  hind  permission  of  the  Keener  of the  -l/.S.S. .  /,',-itish  Museum 


Frontispiece] 


THE    ENGLISH 
DOMINICANS 

SrBEDEJARRETT,O.P. 


NEW  YORK,  CINCINNATI,  CHICAGO 

BENZIGER    BROTHERS 


PRINTERS  TO  THE 
HOLY  APOSTOLIC  SEE 


PUBLISHERS  OF 
BENZIGER's   MAGAZINE 


MCMXXI 


Printed  in  Great  Britain. 


CONTENTS 

Chapter  I.  The  Foundations,     p.  i. 

II.  The  Priory,     p.  24. 

III.  The  Studies,     p.  44. 

IV.  At  Oxford,     p.  65. 

V.  The  Preachers,     p.  86. 

VI.  Royal  Confessors,     p.  106. 

VII.  Observance,     p.  129. 

VIII.  The  Reformation,     p.  151. 

IX.  The  Reorganization,     p.  173. 

X.  The  Restoration,     p.  197. 

Appendix  I.  List  of  English  Dominican  Provincials,  p.  219. 
II.  List  of  English  Dominican  Provincial  Chap- 
ters,    p.  228. 
III.  List  of  English   Dominican   Pre-Reformaton 
Priories,  with  References  to  Articles,  etc. 
p.  231. 

Index,     p.  233. 


*9 


ILLUSTRATIONS 


John  Sifrevvas,  O.P.  (about  a.d.  1400)  offering  his 

ILLUMINATED  LECTIONARY  TO  LORD    LOVEL  OF  TlCH- 

marsh Frontispiece 

Remains  of  Blackfriars,  Canterbury 

Dominican  Priory  at  Ipswich  in  1746. 

Plan  of  London  Blackfriars 

Dominican  lecturing  in  University     . 

Dominican  Church,  Norwich 

Tomb  of  Edward  II  in  Gloucester  Cathedral  . 

Nicolas  Trivet,  O.P.  (1 258-1328) 

Blackfriars  Preaching  Cross  and  Ruins,  Hereford 

The  Cloisters,  Dominican  Priory,  Bristol 

woodchester  chapel :  choir  stalls  on  gospel  side 

Great  Yarmouth:  south-west  tower  of  Dominican 

Priory 


FACING 
PAGE 


English  Dominican  College  at  Bornhem  in  Flanders     180 


Dominican  Noviciate  Priory,  Woodchester 
Hawkesyard  Chapel:  reredos  and  choir  screen 


16 

24 

36 
48 
66 
80 
96 
120 

138 

144 

172 


200 
214 


vi 


TO 

ERNEST  BARKER 

MY  MASTER  AND  MY  FRIEND 


INTRODUCTION 

IT  will  be  immediately  apparent  to  any  real  student 
of  history  how  very  cursory  a  survey  of  English 
Dominican  life  this  volume  is.  But  all  I  would 
desire  for  it  is  that  under  its  inspiration  some  such 
student,  with  fuller  leisure  and  ampler  opportunity, 
should  compile  a  more  detailed  and  more  accurate 
account  of  this  English  Province  of  the  Order  of 
S.  Dominic,  up  till  now  so  curiously  ignored. 

I   must   acknowledge  here   my  gratitude   for   patient 
help  and  suggestion  to  Father  Walter  Gumbley,  O.P. 

Bede  Jarrett,  O.P. 


THE    ENGLISH     DOMINICANS 

CHAPTER  I 
THE  FOUNDATIONS 

SAINT  DOMINIC  was  the  first  to  establish  a  religious 
Order  in  the  modern  sense  of  the  word.  Earlier  in- 
deed than  he,  Saint  Benedict  and  others  had  written 
rules  of  life  that  had  spread  among-  many  abbeys,  but 
these  monastic  legislators  supposed  the  independence 
of  each  house,  and  allowed  to  the  individual  abbot  exceed- 
ingly wide  powers  for  modifying  their  regulations.  The  Cis- 
tercian ideal,  as  propagated  especially  by  Saint  Bernard,  more 
nearly  resembled  our  modern  notion,  for  each  abbey  of  the 
new  reform  was  affiliated  to  Citeaux,  was  subject  to  its  abbot, 
and  had  to  send  a  representative  thither  to  attend  the  yearly 
chapter.  This  same  system  of  centralized  government  was 
accepted  by  the  Canons  Regular  of  Premontre,  and  developed 
in  many  details.  But  Saint  Dominic  went  ahead  of  them 
all  by  his  establishment  of  a  thoroughly  organized  society, 
divided  nationally  into  Provinces,  which  had  their  own  as- 
semblies, and  yet  could  deliberate  at  a  central  chapter  wherein 
the  whole  Order  met.  These  legislative  bodies,  the  provincial 
and  general  chapters,  acted  through  an  executive,  the  Prior 
Provincial  and  the  Master  General,  who  being  elected  by 
these  parliaments  were  answerable  to  them. 

This  centralized  government  enabled  the  Order  to  establish 
itself  at  will  all  through  Christendom,  for  it  could  in  its  as- 
semblies determine  new  fields  of  adventure,  and  had  at  its 
back  resources  of  men  and  influence  such  as  made  success 
assured.  In  1221,  at  the  second  General  Chapter  of  the  Order 
(which  had  been  approved  by  Pope  Honorius  III  on  22  Dec- 
ember 1 2 16)  held  in  Bologna  under  the  presidency  of  Saint 
Dominic,  it  was  agreed  by  the  friars  that  two  new  provinces 
should  be  set  up,  England  1  and  Hungary.  There  had  been 
already  some  connection  between  this  country  and  the  saint, 
for  at  one  time  he  held  by  papal  gift  a  benefice  attached  to 
Saint  Oswald's  Church,  Nostell,*  in  Yorkshire,  and  had 
among  his  first  band  of  disciples  one  whose  name  betokens 
his  race,  Lawrence  the  Englishman.  Tradition,  indeed,  asserts 
that  the  friar  chosen  actually  to  begin  the  English  Province, 
Gilbert  de  Fresney,  was  himself  a  native  of  this  country;  and 
this  gathers  some  support  from  the  frequency  with  which  the 
name  Fresney  appears  in  the  records  of  Henry  Ill's  reign. 
Apparently  de  Fresney  was  a  French  equivalent  for  Fraxinetus 
or  Ash. 

A  very  brief  account  of  the  coming  of  the  Preaching  Friars 

1  Trivet,  Annates  (edited  by  Thomas  Hog,  1845,  London),  p.  209. 

2  Palmer,  Life  of  Philip  Thomas  Howard  (1867,  London),  p.  14. 

B 


2  Xlbe  Englisb  Dominicans 

to  England  can  be  given  in  the  words  of  an  English  Domini- 
can born  within  a  generation  from  the  date : 

"At  the  second  Chapter  General  of  the  Order  of  Friar 
Preachers  which  was  held  at  Bologna  under  the  blessed 
Dominic,  there  were  sent  into  England  Friar  Preachers  to  the 
number  of  thirteen,  having  as  their  Prior  Friar  Gilbert  of 
Fresney.  In  company  of  the  venerable  Father,  Lord  Peter 
des  Roches,  Bishop  of  Winchester,  they  reached  Canterbury. 
After  they  had  presented  themselves  to  Lord  Stephen,  the 
Archbishop,  and  he  had  understood  that  they  were  Preachers, 
he  straightway  ordered  Gilbert  to  preach  before  him  in  a  certain 
church  where  he  was  himself  that  day  to  have  preached.  The 
prelate  was  so  edified  by  the  Friar's  sermon  that  henceforward 
during  all  his  episcopate  he  favoured  and  promoted  the  Order 
and  its  work. 

"Leaving  Canterbury  the  Friars  came  to  London  on  the 
feast  of  Saint  Lawrence,  and  finally  reached  Oxford  on  the 
feast  of  the  Assumption  of  the  glorious  Virgin  to  whose 
honour  they  built  their  oratory. 

"They  held  the  schools,  which  are  now  called  Saint 
Edward's,  and  settled  in  that  parish  for  some  time,  but  find- 
ing that  they  had  there  no  room  for  expanding  they  removed 
to  another  site  given  them  by  the  King,  where  now  outside 
the  city-walls  they  still  dwell."  1 

It  is  impossible  not  to  see  in  this  first  settlement  at  Oxford 
the  purpose  for  which  Saint  Dominic  had  sent  them  to  England, 
for  it  was  part  of  his  scheme  of  preaching  to  establish  priories 
in  the  University  towns.  It  will  be  seen  when  we  come  to 
trace  the  actual  preaching  work  accomplished  in  England 
that  the  ideals  of  the  saint  were  revolutionary  in  the  West  of 
Christendom,  and  had  up  to  his  own  time  resulted  always  in 
disorder  and  heresy,  for  his  whole  ambition  was  to  set  going 
the  detailed  exposition  of  Catholic  faith,  and  spread  its  in- 
telligent appreciation  over  all  the  Church.  In  what  sense  this 
was  really  proper  to  Saint  Dominic  will  appear  later,  but  it 
helped  to  make  him  insist  on  a  university  education  for  all 
his  brethren.  Even  the  little  band  of  seven  that  grouped 
itself  round  him  in  Toulouse,  men  chiefly  in  middle  life,  were 
taken  off  to  the  theological  lectures  of  an  English  professor 
there,  Alexander  de  Stavensby  (afterwards  in  England,  as 
Bishop  of  Lichfield  and  Coventry,  their  most  devoted  cham- 
pion), and  when  later  the  discipleship  was  scattered  over 
Europe  it  was  sent  to  Paris,  Bologna,  Rome,  etc.,  to  attend 
the  schools  as  well  as  to  occupy  the  pulpit.  Eventually  the 
friars  came  themselves  to  be  professors,  but  this  was  rather 
the  result  of  circumstances  than  of  set  design,  though  the 
alert  mind  of  the  founder  seized  on  it  and  developed  the  idea. 
Hence  we  can  be  almost  sure  that  Saint  Dominic,  near  to  his 
1  Trivet,  p.  209. 


Ghe  foundations  3 

death,  sent  his  friars  to  England  with  the  direct  intention  of 
their  establishment  immediately  at  the  university  centres  of 
the  country. 

With  Oxford  and  London  as  their  base  the  friars  gradually 
spread  over  England.  Sometimes  they  arrived  on  invitation 
of  some  benefactor,  ecclesiastical  or  lay,  sometimes  entirely 
on  their  own  initiation,  but  with  the  certainty  of  finding  local 
patrons  as  soon  as  their  presence  and  work  became  manifest. 
Matthew  Paris,1  the  Benedictine  Chronicler  whose  animus 
against  them  is  apparent,  but  who  probably  had  genuine 
grounds  for  his  vehemence,  asserts  that  they  used  many  de- 
vices for  the  purpose  of  settling  in  districts  that  were  populous 
and  would  secure  them  much  influence.  With  rather  pictur- 
esque humour  he  describes  how  they  strayed  into  the  domain 
of  the  larger  abbeys,  professing  to  be  merely  preaching  a 
passing  sermon,  and  to  be  willing  to  leave  as  soon  as  that 
was  over,  but  they  invariably  grew  so  ill  that  they  had  to 
linger  on  in  the  houses  of  those  that  sheltered  them,  and  set 
up  altars  secretly  at  which  they  said  mass  in  a  very  low  tone, 
until  people  had  grown  accustomed  to  their  presence,  when 
they  boldly  started  to  build  a  church,  and  when  interfered 
with  retorted  by  saying  evil  things  about  the  lives  of  the 
monks.  He  gives  a  definite  instance  in  the  case  of  Dunstable,2 
where  we  have  a  great  deal  of  evidence  from  the  royal  records 
by  which  to  control  and  estimate  at  its  value  his  accusation. 
Perhaps  he  was  referring  more  particularly  to  country  places 
where  on  the  whole  the  monastic  influence  was  most  strong, 
for  in  the  towns  there  is  abundant  evidence  of  their  instant 
success,  and  the  open  way  in  which  their  priories  were 
founded  and  benefactors  came  forward  to  their  support. 
The  great  industrial  centres  had  most  need  of  them,  and 
gave  the  chief  opportunity  for  their  distinctive  work  of 
preaching,  so  that  Newcastle-on-Tyne,  Bristol,  Norwich, 
saw  them  within  a  few  years  of  their  arrival.  Bishops  like 
Stavensby  of  Lichfield,  des  Roches  of  Winchester,  Grosseteste 
of  Lincoln,  Mauclerk  of  Carlisle,  actively  assisted  their  founda- 
tion throughout  their  dioceses,  and  high  statesmen  like  Hubert 
de  Burgh,  or  nobles  like  the  de  Montforts  of  Leicester  helped 
to  spread  their  popularity.  In  England,  whether  they  began 
in  this  way  through  their  own  energy  or  local  benefactors, 
in  nearly  every  case  the  royal  interest  in  their  success  was 
supreme.  There  is  hardly  one  Dominican  house  in  all  the 
Kingdom  that  did  not  look  to  one  or  other  of  the  Plantagenets 
as  its  effective  founder,  for  even  if  the  site  was  not  a  royal 
gift,  as  it  very  often  was,  then  lime  or  timber  or  stone  from 
the  domain  of  the  Crown  arrived  to  push  forward  the  build- 
ing.   Sometimes  there  were  gifts  of  money,  or  the  debts  were 

1  Matthew  Paris,  Chron.  Major  (Roll  Series,  1876),  vol.  iii,  p.  332. 

2  Ibid. ,  vol.  v,  p.  742. 


4  Ube  Bnglisb  S>omimcans 

heroically  taken  over  by  the  already  impoverished  Exchequer, 
or  definite  amounts  were  given  for  definite  purposes.  The 
actual  payments  were  in  many  cases  quite  small,  but  their 
frequency  enables  us  to  understand  the  terrible  confusion  in 
which  the  royal  finances  from  Henry  Ill's  time  onward  were 
involved. 

Canterbury  is  an  excellent  example  of  the  wholesale  way  in 
which  the  King"  went  to  work.  In  1247  l  and  in  12532  he  gave 
seventy  marks  in  all  to  satisfy  the  Priory's  creditors;  in  12563 
he  paid  one  hundred  and  sixty  shillings  for  stained  glass 
windows  for  the  church;  in  12584  he  added  ^32  for  some 
buildings  in  honour  of  his  patron  Saint  Edward;  in  12595  he 
ordered  his  officials  to  find  ^20  to  erect  a  kitchen  and  wall 
near  it.  The  house  was  partly  built  over  a  stream,  and  this 
accounts  for  further  sums  laid  out  on  repairing  walls  and  for 
making  wharfs,  while  the  church  was  practically  rebuilt  at 
the  royal  expense  in  1243,6  with  the  detailed  addition  of  a 
winding  stair,  presumably  from  the  dormitory  to  the  choir. 
This  is  no  isolated  case,  but  could  be  paralleled  in  the  history 
of  almost  every  Dominican  house  in  England. 

The  Earl  of  Kent  was  their  first  benefactor  in  London  by 
presenting  them  with  land  in  Holborn,  which  he  had  bought 
expressly  for  the  purpose.7  On  it  there  seem  to  have  already 
stood  some  buildings,  and  these  were  adapted  by  the  friars 
to  their  own  life.  The  church  was  a  later  addition,  so  that 
they  probably  began  by  officiating  in  the  neighbouring 
churches.  But  the  list  of  records  of  gifts  is  monotonous, 
whether  taken  simply  from  the  royal  exchequer,  or  from  the 
wills  and  bequests  of  the  period.  Through  it  all  there  is  a 
persistent  stream  of  royal  favours.  Oaks,  free-stone  and  lime 
were  the  chief  needs  of  the  friars,  which  implies  that  what- 
ever was  the  original  edifice  then  standing,  it  was  wholly  in- 
adequate for  the  purposes  of  the  growing  community.  In 
1243  the  actual  number  of  the  Dominicans  in  the  Holborn 
Priory  is  given,  for  on  9  December  Henry  III  ordered  that 
eighty  habits  and  eighty  pairs  of  shoes  should  be  presented 
to  the  Preachers  of  Holborn  as  a  seasonable  Christmas  gift. 
Clothing  vies  with  food  and  fuel  as  one  of  the  chief  forms  in 
which  the  royal  bounty  was  expressed.    Simultaneously  with 

1  P.R. O.  Rot.  de  Liberate,  31  Hen.  Ill,  m.  10;  also  32  Hen.  Ill,  m.  13. 
-  Ibid.,  37  Hen.  Ill,  m.  6;  also  ibid.,  37  Hen.  Ill,  m.  2. 
3  Ibid.,  40  Hen.  Ill,  m.  3. 

*  P.R.O.  Rot.  Pat.,  42  Hen.  Ill,  m.  2;  Rot.  de  Liberate,  43  Hen.  Ill, 
m.  8. 

5  P.R.O.  Rot.  de  Liberate,  44  Hen.  Ill,  m.  10. 

6  Ibid.,  28  Hen.  Ill,  m.  16. 

7  Reliquary,  vol.  xvii  (July  and  Oct.  1876)  gives  the  history  of  the 
foundation  of  the  Holborn  Priory.  For  the  Priory  at  Ludgate  see  Merry 
England,  Nos.  72-77  (April-Sept.  1889);  Archaeologia,  vol.  lxiii,  pp.  57-84;, 
Clapham  and  Godfrey,  Some  Famous  Buildings  (1913),  pp.  239-269. 


XTbe  ffounfcations  5 

their  work,  Henry  himself  was  engaged  on  some  buildings  of 
his  own  at  Westminster,  and  occasionally  was  so  hard  pressed 
that  he  had  to  borrow  from  the  friars  the  lime  and  stone  he 
had  given  them,  though  he  took  care  in  all  the  cases  of  which 
we  have  record  diligently  to  repay  them.  From  the  materials 
required  in  his  ornamentation  of  the  Abbey  he  gave  over  to 
the  Dominicans  "five  figures  of  kings  carved  in  free-stone 
and  a  pedestal  for  a  figure  of  the  Virgin  for  making  their 
acqueduct."  This  artistic  conduit  appears  to  have  been  re- 
erected  in  Ludgate,  where  the  friars  had  to  move  in  1275,  as 
their  own  site  in  Holborn  had  become  too  straitened  for  their 
work,  and  the  huge  extent  of  their  building.  Here  in  Ludgate 
the  whole  labour  had  to  be  begun  all  over  again,  but  Edward  I 
was  at  least  as  generous  as  his  father  had  been.  Together 
with  his  queen  Eleanor  and  Kilwardby,  the  Dominican  Arch- 
bishop of  Canterbury,  he  was  really  responsible  for  the  new 
Priory  and  Church,  and  was  looked  upon  as  its  founder. 

But  the  climax  of  royal  generosity  to  the  English  Dominicans 
was  reached  under  Edward  II  in  his  generosity  to  the  Noviciate 
house  of  the  Province  at  King's  Langley  in  Hertfordshire.1 
The  Priory  had  been  begun  by  the  Oxford  friars,  who  secured 
a  grant  of  a  site  from  the  Crown ;  to  this  the  King  desired 
personally  to  add  an  endowment,  but  their  sturdy  independ- 
ence forbade  them  to  accept  it.  In  the  end  Edward  appealed 
to  the  Pope,  who  seems  to  have  decided  that  the  friars  were 
in  the  right,  for  from  that  date  no  more  is  heard  of  the  King's 
designs  in  that  direction.  Foiled,  however,  in  the  matter  of 
the  endowment  he  continued  to  bestow  frequent  alms  on  the 
house,  which  indeed  in  consequence  changed  its  name  from 
Chiltern  Langley  into  King's  Langley.  It  had  become  almost 
entirely  a  royal  foundation.  The  reason  for  this  especial  pro- 
tection was,  in  the  words  of  the  Patent  Rolls,  Edward's  per- 
sonal devotion  "to  the  glorious  confessor  of  Christ,  Blessed 
Dominic  " ;  but  in  a  moment  of  sudden  peril  the  King  had 
made  a  vow  to  found  at  Langley  a  perpetual  house  of  prayer 
for  the  souls  of  his  Plantagenet  ancestors,  and  this  added  a 
new  stimulus  to  his  generosity.  The  final  motive,  and  prob- 
ably the  most  weighty  in  his  eyes,  was  that  here  later  was 
brought  the  body  of  his  best  and  dearest  favourite,  Piers 
Gaveston.  This  young  courtier,  handsome  and  highly  amus- 
ing, had  developed  a  taste  for  epigram,  and  had  been  endowed 
with  the  fatal  gift  of  coining  exquisite  nicknames.  While  thus 
enabling  Edward  to  get  more  pleasure  out  of  his  council  than 
otherwise  he  could  possibly  have  obtained,  Piers  won  at  the 
same  time  the  hatred  of  the  barons  who  resented  his  wit  as 
frivolous,  and  his  neat  descriptions  of  themselves  as  an  attack 
on  the  solemnity  of  Parliament.  By  marriage  he  had  acquired 
relationship  with  the  King,  as  his  wife  was  Margaret,  the 
1  Reliquary,  vol.  xix  (July  and  Oct.  1878,  April  1879). 


6  Ube  Engltsb  Dominicans 

daughter  of  the  Earl  of  Gloucester,  whose  wife  was  the 
King's  sister,  and  by  royal  grant  he  had  entered  as  Earl  of 
Cornwall  into  the  first  rank  of  the  baronage.  But  this  only 
added  to  the  embittered  feelings  of  his  rivals,  who  preferred 
to  look  upon  the  young  man  as  the  abettor  of  Edward's  folly 
and  extravagance. 

When,  therefore,  he  fell  into  the  hands  of  the  nobility  they 
at  once  proceeded  to  his  trial,  and  beheaded  him  near  Warwick 
on  19  June  131 2.  By  chance  a  Dominican  friar  was  in  attend- 
ance, and  knowing,  as  all  England  knew,  the  devotion  of  the 
King  to  the  young  man,  he  picked  up  the  head  and  carried  it 
in  his  hood  to  Edward.  The  body  was  then  taken  to  the 
Dominican  Priory  at  Oxford,  where  the  King  and  his  niece 
lavished  every  attention  on  it.  Clerks  were  paid  for  to  watch 
and  pray  by  the  side  of  the  hearse,  and  Masses  were  said 
both  there  and  in  the  London  Priory  for  the  repose  of  the 
soul  of  the  victim.  Every  year,  on  the  anniversary  of  the 
death,  some  gift  or  adornment  testified  to  the  King's  remem- 
brance. Foolish  and  vain  and  extravagant,  Edward  may 
well  in  his  liberal  generosity  have  been,  though  this  has  been 
much  exaggerated  by  past  historians,  for  a  good  deal  of  his 
trouble  was  due  to  the  hopeless  state  in  which  the  royal 
finances  had  been  left  by  Edward  I ;  but  with  all  his  defects 
of  character  he  had  no  trace  in  him  of  ingratitude.  Piers 
Gaveston  had  been  faithful  and  loyal  (save  that  he  spoke 
rather  calumniously  of  his  mother-in-law,  who  was  the  King's 
sister),  his  personal  charm  had  been  of  real  joy  to  the  young 
King,  whose  boyishness  must  have  been  terribly  depressed 
by  the  bullying  and  boorishness  of  the  nobles ;  he  had  been 
the  one  ray  of  light  in  the  midst  of  a  great  deal  of  troubled 
darkness,  so  that  Edward  missed  him  and  mourned  for  him 
till  his  own  terrible  ending. 

For  three  years  the  body  lay  at  the  Dominicans  at  Oxford, 
where  each  day  a  Mass  was  celebrated,  and  the  Office  of  the 
dead  said  by  clerks  and  the  friars.  At  each  corner  of  the 
hearse,  where  the  embalmed  body  rested,  was  the  figure  of 
an  angel  and  an  evangelist,  while  all  round  it  burnt  ever 
lighted  candles.  In  the  quaint  style  of  that  age,  besides  these 
guardian  spirits  and  saints  was  placed  a  candle  standard 
shaped  as  a  Judas  to  represent,  apparently,  the  enemies  who 
had  betrayed  him.  But  this  dark  shadow  and  the  daily 
presence  of  the  unburied  corpse  does  not  seem  at  all  to  have 
lessened  the  appetites  of  the  clerks  who  at  the  Royal  expense 
sojourned  with  the  friars.  Receipts  are  still  extant  among 
the  Patent  Rolls,  day  by  day  records  of  the  fare  per  head.  It 
is  a  gorgeous  list,  so  immense  as  to  read  like  some  stately 
catalogue  from  Homer:  beef,  mutton,  poultry,  larks,  eggs, 
mallard,  stock  fish,  haddock,  ray,  codling,  plaice,  eels,  pike, 
roach,   herrings,    oysters,   apples,   nuts,    rice,   honey,    pears. 


Ufoe  ^foundations  7 

Then  for  household  items  are  firewood,  charcoal,  and 
candles;  for  their  horses,  hay  and  straw;  for  their  drink,  ale 
and  wine;  for  their  servants,  wages;  for  the  friars,  a  daily 
offering-  of  2d.  Sometimes  visitors  came  to  dine,  and  thus 
relieved  the  monotony  of  existence  and  withdrew  thoughts 
from  the  dreary  business  for  which  they  lingered  in  Oxford. 
But  the  King  had  to  be  answerable  for  this,  and  when  the 
Canons  of  Saint  Frideswide  (now  Christ  Church  Cathedral) 
sat  down  to  the  table  bottles  of  wine  were  added,  which 
debited  a  further  \od.  from  the  Exchequer  at  Westminster. 
The  bill  ran  altogether  into  hundreds  of  pounds  ;  but  the 
King  still  diminished  in  no  way  the  pomp  and  circumstance 
of  his  grief. 

Meanwhile  preparations  were  being  made  at  Langley  to 
receive  the  body.  Carpenters  and  chandlers  were  paid  for 
various  journeys  and  work;  grooms  and  horses  were  per- 
petually on  the  move ;  but  the  body  still  lay  at  Oxford.  At 
last,  on  24  December,  the  pageant  began.  A  chariot  left 
London  on  that  day,  and  two  black  horses  to  draw  it;  five 
grooms  and  their  five  steeds  evidently  formed  the  cortege. 
At  Uxbridge  a  breakdown  occurred,  and  the  chariot  cost 
5-y.  3d.  to  repair;  then  a  halt  was  made  at  Wycombe  for 
Christmas  Day's  festivities.  The  next  day  the  procession  re- 
started, but  it  had  suffered  (why,  we  are  not  told  though  can 
shrewdly  guess)  the  loss  of  one  horse  and  two  grooms  who 
spent  the  hours  ensuing  on  Christmas  night  ill  and  unable  to 
proceed.  At  Tetsworth  an  iron  bolt  was  jolted  out  of  the 
chariot,  and  this  for  its  renewal  added  is.  lod.  to  the  carriage 
bill,  but  without  further  mishap  Oxford  was  reached  upon 
Friday,  27  December.  The  week-end  was  quietly  enjoyed,  so 
that  upon  the  Monday  they  began  their  return  journey, 
having  with  them  now  the  body.  Through  Thame  they 
passed  to  Great  Missenden  and  thence  to  St.  Albans,  where 
three  days'  halt  was  made  to  allow  the  King,  who  was  keep- 
ing Christmas  at  Windsor,  to  reach  the  Priory  he  had  so  richly 
endowed  in  remembrance  of  his  ill-fated  young  friend.  On 
3  January  the  body  was  once  more  covered  with  balm  and 
rich  garments,  and  lowered  to  its  final  resting  place  in  the 
presence  of  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  the  Bishops  of 
London,  Winchester,  Worcester,  and  Bath  and  Wells. 
Abbots  and  monks  and  friars  came  also  in  great  numbers ; 
while,  strangely,  some  of  the  baronage  made  a  show  of 
sympathy;  the  Earls  of  Norfolk  (the  King's  brother)  and 
Pembroke  (who  represented  a  middle  school  of  politicians, 
half-way  between  the  extremists  and  the  King),  Badlesmere, 
the  Despensers,  Henry  Beaumont,  John  Handlo  the  Chan- 
cellor, the  Treasurer,  the  Mayor  of  London,  Sir  William 
Sage,  one  of  the  Justices  of  the  Common  Pleas,  and  other 
officials  who  belonged  heart  and  soul  to  the  King's  party. 


s  Xlbe  Englisb  Dominicans 

To  a  student  of  the  constitutional  history  of  the  reign  the  list 
is  of  real  importance,  for  it  shows  how  already  there  were 
rallying  to  the  King  many  who  had  so  far  sided  with  that 
impossible  constitutionalist,  Thomas  of  Lancaster.  Recently 
it  has  been  stated  that  Badlesmere  and  Pembroke  made  their 
alliance  of  moderate  Ordainers  in  their  joint  embassy  to 
Avignon  during  December  1316.1  But  fully  twelve  months 
before  they  had  found  some  sort  of  reconciliation  round  the 
grave  of  Gaveston.  His  death  and  burial  had  proved  more 
effective  than  his  life  in  ensuring  to  his  royal  friend  the  real 
rule  of  his  people.  It  was  little  wonder  that  Edward  regarded 
the  Langley  Priory  as  a  spot  particularly  dear  to  him.  His 
generosity  provided  for  the  support  first  of  45  friars,  then  of 
55,  and  before  13 14  was  out  of  100,  for  which  he  drew  from 
the  already  exhausted  Exchequer  the  annual  sum  of  500 
marks.  These  friars  were  all  bound  to  celebrate  Mass  for 
the  repose  of  the  soul  of  Piers  Gaveston.  When  Edward  I  IPs 
advisers  sought  to  economize,  they  cut  down  the  number  of 
friars  from  100  to  13;  but  when  the  King  came  into  his  own 
he  increased  his  donations  till  40  could  be  provided  for,  and 
this  Richard  II  turned  into  60,  which  continued  to  be  the 
number  till  the  reign  of  Henry  VIII. 

Besides  these  fixed  charges,  which  made  this  friary  the 
richest  in  all  England,  Edward  II  was  continually  adding 
smaller  benefactions  in  memory  of  his  dead  favourite.  Each 
anniversary  meant  further  offerings  for  the  celebration  of  the 
Holy  Sacrifice,  and  usually  an  additional  course  at  meal-time, 
while  several  times  the  King  with  his  own  hands  came  to  lay 
a  pall  over  the  tomb.  In  1320  it  was  a  Turkey  cloth,  in  1324 
a  piece  of  red  silk  decorated  with  golden  embroidery,  in  1325 
two  made  of  cloth  of  gold,  one  red,  and  one  white. 

Edward  III  further  continually  financed  the  building  and 
repairing,  and  thus  converted  the  Priory  entirely  into  a  royal 
foundation,  wherein  for  the  original  intention  of  prayers  daily 
offered  for  Piers  Gaveston  were  now  substituted  prayers  for 
the  King  and  the  royal  house  of  Plantagenet,  living  and  dead. 
Alien  priories  had  to  contribute  to  the  upkeep  of  the  extensive 
line  of  buildings.  Royal  manors  were  charged  with  the  same 
burden.  The  stone  quarries  of  Wheatly  and  the  forests  of 
Shotover  paid  in  kind  for  improvements  and  extensions.  Wine 
and  ale  arrive  periodically,  for  which  purpose  no  doubt  on 
2Aprili377Edward  III  presented  his  maze  cup,  called  Edward, 
and  thirty-nine  other  cups,  which  were  never  to  be  alienated 
from  the  Priory.  Richard  II,  whose  character  and  fortunes 
so  nearly  resembled  those  of  his  great-grandfather,  was  as 
devoted  as  he  had  been  to  the  Dominican  Order.  His  elder 
brother,  the  first-born  son  of  the  Black  Prince,  was  buried  in 
the  Langley  Church,  and  this  memory  may  have  drawn  the 

1  T.  F.  Tout,  Place  of  Edivard  II  in  English  History  (1904),  p.  112. 


XTbe  foundations  9 

King  here,  for  his  presence  is  continually  noted  at  the  Priory. 
He  spent  Christmas  here  in  1395,  paid  40^.  for  a  sermon 
preached  to  him  by  John  Deeping-,  a  Dominican,  afterwards 
Bishop  of  Waterford  and  Lismore,  and  on  the  feast  of  the 
Epiphany  offered  a  noble  of  gold,  with  frankincense  and 
myrrh.  At  the  end  his  own  broken  body,  done  to  death 
mysteriously  like  Edward  IPs,  was  brought  here  for  burial, 
though  Henry  V  eventually  translated  the  remains  to  the 
Abbey  of  Westminster.  Edmund  of  Langley,  Duke  of  York, 
whom  Shakespeare,  in  his  "  Richard  II  "  so  sympathetically 
describes,  was  also  buried  here,  surviving  his  royal  nephew 
only  eight  months.  Over  his  remains  was  erected  an  altar- 
tomb  of  black  marble  and  alabaster,  but  no  recumbent  effigy 
appears  to  have  adorned  it. 

Thus  through  200  years  the  foundation  fared,  losing  con- 
siderably at  the  end  of  its  time,  and  dwindling  in  numbers. 
Atthe  dissolution  only  the  prior  subscribed  the  royal  supremacy, 
so  that  the  size  of  the  community  cannot  be  gauged.  Indeed 
so  poor  had  the  house  become,  despite  the  wonderfully  long 
list  of  generous  gifts  made  by  each  succeeding  sovereign,  that 
Ingworth,  the  last  prior,  when  inviting  Cromwell  to  the  Priory, 
lamented  "  suche  pore  logeyingand  provysyon  as  we  have  for 
yo'  mast'  chype  and  yowers,"and  could  only  send  as  some  sort 
of  propitiatory  offering  "a  pore  Suffolke  chese  and  halfe  a 
dosen  conys."1 

Again,  Dartford  Convent2  was  another  foundation  royally 
endowed.  The  idea  of  establishing  a  house  in  England  for 
Dominican  nuns  seems  to  have  originated  with  a  vow  of 
Queen  Eleanor  of  Castile,  though  the  first  records  we  have  of 
any  attempt  really  to  make  it  definite  date  from  the  reign  of 
her  son,  Edward  II.  First  in  1318,  through  two  friars,  Richard 
of  Birton  and  Andrew  Aslakeby,  he  endeavoured  to  secure 
papal  permission  for  transferring  the  Dominicans  from  their 
Priory  at  Guildford  and  putting  nuns  in  their  place,  because  no 
doubt  the  King  felt  the  difficulty  of  having  to  fulfil  his  mother's 
vow,  and  looked  about  for  the  least  expensive  way  of  doing  so. 
But  the  Guildford  friars  protested  and  appealed  to  the  charters 
of  their  foundress,  Queen  Eleanor  of  Provence,  whose  bene- 
faction would  necessarily  be  injured  by  her  grandson.  Rome 
upheld  their  appeal.  Still  Edward  was  determined,  with  his 
exchequer  all  disordered,  not  to  add  if  he  could  help  it  to  his 
financial  burden,  and  thought  of  his  own  magnificent  friary  of 
King's  Langley.  As  he  was  the  founder,  he  would  be  injuring 
no  one's  bequest  but  his  own  if  he  were  to  turn  out  the  friars 
from  here  and  substitute  sisters  for  them.  Again,  therefore, 
Birton  and  Aslakeby  journeyed  to  Rome  in  January  1319  to 

1  Ellis,  Miscellaneous  Letters,  temp.  Henry  VIII,  Series  II,  vol.  xix, 
no.  24  (1827-1846). 

2  Archaeological Jo it r n al,  vol.  xxxv(i878),  and  vol.  xxxix  (1882). 


io  Zhe  Bnolisb  Dominicans 

propose  this  to  the  Holy  See;  but  this,  too,  for  some  reason 
the  Pope  equally  rejected.  In  despair  of  any  such  way  of  econo- 
mizing over  his  mother's  vow,  and  tired  of  his  previous 
ambassadors,  in  1321  he  sent  Hugh  of  Offenton  and  John  of 
Cleye,  both  Dominicans,  to  petition  for  licence  to  erect  a 
Nunnery  anywhere.  The  Pope,  by  this  time  equally  tired, 
agreed  to  this  vague  request  and  as  vaguely  answered  it  with 
a  brief.  But  death  prevented  Edward  from  ever  doing  anything 
himself. 

His  son  in  turn  deliberately  bound  himself  to  observe  his 
grandmother's  vow,  but  waited  patiently  for  some  way  out  of 
the  difficulty.  Meanwhile  Sir  Thomas  Wake  of  Lidell,  for  pur- 
poses of  his  own,  solicited  permission  from  the  King  to  bring 
over  four  or  six  Dominicanesses  from  Brabant  and  to  found  a 
house  for  them  in  England.  Edward  agreed,  and  at  the  same 
time  evidently  remembered  his  earlier  vow,  and  was  stimulated 
to  take  an  interest  in  the  matter  himself.  Anyway  Wake 
dropped  out  of  the  scheme,  and  instead  an  idea  began  to  cross 
the  royal  mind  of  a  totally  new  foundation  at  Dartford. 
Correspondence  over  this  latter  project  assumed  from  1345 
onwards  a  large  place  in  the  recorded  letters  of  Edward, 
the  Bishop  and  Chapter  of  Rochester,  the  Archbishop  of 
Canterbury,  and  the  Vicar  of  Dartford.  By  1349  a  site  had 
been  found  for  "  the  house  of  our  beloved  sisters  in  Christ 
of  the  Order  of  Friar  Preachers,  which  we  order  to  be  newly 
built  in  that  town."  There  remained,  however,  this  much  of 
Edward  IPs  later  proposal,  that  Dartford  Convent  in  1351 
was  put  under  a  body  of  friars  from  King's  Langley  who 
were  to  be  selected  and  appointed  by  the  Prior  of  that  Convent. 
Indeed,  the  Prior  of  King's  Langley  is  occasionally  described 
as  Prior  also  of  Dartford.  Just  once,  as  late,  however,  as 
141 5,  the  nuns  protested  against  the  visitation  of  the  Prior 
and  Provincial,  but  otherwise  the  relations  between  friars  and 
sisters  seem  to  have  worked  out  well. 

In  1356  certain  issues  and  rents  were  ordered  by  Edward 
to  be  paid  "to  the  work  of  the  new  house  and  building  of 
the  Preaching  Nuns  of  Dartford,"  so  that  the  convent  cannot 
yet  have  been  finished.  Yet  it  is  in  that  very  year  that  John  of 
Woodruff,  King's  Confessor,  has  ^20  from  the  Royal  Ex- 
chequer for  his  expenses  in  bringing  over  four  foreign  sisters 
from  France  to  Dartford.  Of  these,  one  named  Matilda  was 
made  Prioress  and  ten  other  English  ladies  were  added  to  the 
community.  In  1358  an  additional  pension  is  made  to  these 
original  four,  so  that  they  evidently  are  to  fare  better  than  the 
rest.  Indeed,  in  1363  the  King  paid  all  their  debts  contracted 
in  France;  but,  as  though  to  quiet  their  southern  gaiety, 
ominously  ordered  that  within  the  choir  were  to  be  placed  four 
marble  slabs  for  tombs.  However,  Prioress  Matilda  managed 
to  keep  alive  for  many  years  after  that.    It  is  difficult  to  make 


Zftc  foundations  1 1 

out  how  much  of  the  convent  was  now  complete.  In  1358 
Friar  John  of  Northampton  had  ^10  a  year  for  life  for  superin- 
tending the  building  works  in  erection  at  Dartford,  which 
might  either  be  taken  to  imply  that  the  strenuousness  of  his 
charge  demanded  a  rewarding  pension  or  that  the  King 
fancied  the  workmen  would  be  likely  to  outlast  the  good 
Friar's  life,  and  even  then  not  be  finished.  Edward  III,  how- 
ever, in  his  last  will  implies  that  all  was  complete,  for  an 
endowment  was  left  for  forty  nuns  in  accordance  with  the 
vow  of  Queen  Eleanor  of  Castile.  To  Richard  III  it  appeared 
that  the  house  had  not  been  sufficiently  built  nor  properly 
endowed,  and  he  brought  the  rents  up  so  as  to  support  a 
community  of  sixty,  which  number  presumably  lasted  on  till 
the  Reformation.  The  names  of  the  Prioress  and  occasionally 
even  the  names  of  simple  nuns  are  to  be  met  with  by  sheer 
chance.  In  the  British  Museum  is  a  beautiful  copy  of  St. 
Bonaventure's  "  Pricking  of  Love,"  carrying  this  inscription 
on  the  first  spare  leaf:  "This  book  longeth  to  Dame  Alice 
Braithwait,  the  Worshipful  Prioress  of  Dartford,  Jesu  mercy: 
Pray  for  the  soul  of  Dame  Elizabeth  Rede  of  this  place :  pray 
for  the  soul  of  Joan  Newmarch."  Again,  Sir  John  Rudstone, 
in  a  will  of  1530:  "  Item  I  bequeath  towards  the  amendment 
of  the  Walls  about  the  monastery  of  the  Nuns  of  Dartford  in 
the  county^f  Kent,  to  the  intent  that  the  convent  of  the  same 
will  have  my  soul  recommended  to  their  devout  prayers, 
twenty  pounds  sterling.  Item  I  bequeath  unto  the  lady  Prioress 
of  Dartford  aforesaid  a  white  habit  of  5s.  every  yard  thereof. 
Item  I  bequeath  unto  Elizabeth  Cresner  professed  Nun  of 
Dartford  aforesaid  a  habit  of  cloth  of  white,  the  value  ot 
6.y.  8d.  every  yard  thereof.  Item  I  bequeath  unto  each  of 
Beatrice  Marshall,  Margaret  Mountenay,  and  Felice,  some- 
time gentlewomen  to  my  lady  of  Salisbury,  now  nuns  in  the 
said  monastery,  a  white  habit  of  55.  every  yard  thereof."  He 
evidently  thought  Elizabeth  Cresner,  who  had  character 
enough  later  to  face  as  Prioress  the  whole  of  the  Tudor  Court 
villains,  deserved  the  better  dress.  So,  too,  Agnes  Parker, 
the  widow  of  an  innkeeper  left  in  1535  to  the  friars  at  Dartford 
3s.  and  to  "  Mother  Bolton"  a  frock.  The  habit  worn  was  the 
Augustinian  black  and  white.  Of  Jane  Fisher  we  find  reference 
in  1481,  when  the  Master-General  gave  her  leave  to  have  a 
master  to  instruct  her  in  grammar  and  the  Latin  tongue. 
The  class  is  to  be  held  in  the  "speak-room"  where,  from 
another  permission  of  the  General  to  the  same  Sister  Jane  in 
1500,  we  gather  there  was  a  grill.  When  Jane  Fane  was 
recommended  in  1536  to  Cromwell  for  the  office  of  Prioress 
she  is  described  as  being  the  most  learned  of  the  nuns,  the 
most  discreet,  and  over  thirty  years  of  age.  But  the  most 
important  perhaps  of  all  the  sisters  was  Bridget  Plantagenet, 
Edward  IV's  youngest  daughter.    After  the    exciting  times 


12  xrbe  Bnglisb  Dominicans 

that  immediately  preceded  and  followed  upon  Richard  Ill's 
usurpation,  and  after  her  mother  had  died,  she  entered  the 
convent,  where  her  sister,  Queen  Elizabeth  of  York,  paid  a 
yearly  pension  for  her.  Allusions  to  payments  and  to  the  visits 
of  messengers  show  what  alone  broke  in  on  the  quietness  of 
her  life,  for  she  remained  just  a  simple  nun  till  her  death  in 
1517  at  the  age  of  thirty-seven.  Of  the  manner  of  life  of  these 
sisters  we  know  little  enough,  but  these  two  wills  that  follow 
suggest  the  richness  and  grandeur  of  their  splendid  tran- 
quillity. The  first  indeed  does  not  refer  to  Dartford,  but  with 
the  second  it  suggests  some  comparisons.  In  1498  Joan  Bolle ' 
left  to  her  daughter,  "  Alice  Oliver,  ancress  in  the  Blackfriars 
of  Salisbury,  a  table  cloth  of  diaper  and  a  towell  of  diaper 
and  half  a  dozen  napkins  of  diaper.  Item  also  a  pair  of  sheets, 
a  pair  of  beads  of  corall  with  gawdies  of  silver  and  gilt." 
In  1 500  William  Millet2  of  Dartford,  among  other  huge  bene- 
factions to  the  convent,  mentions:  "To  my  lady  prioress  of 
Dartford  a  powder-box  of  silver  gilt,  a  salt  of  silver  parcel 
gilt  with  the  covering,  a  great  carpet  to  lay  under  their  feet 
when  they  shall  receive  the  blessed  Sacrament  and  a  hanging 
of  tapestry- work." 

The  history  of  these  priories  has  been  given  at  considerable 
length  because  it  is  typical  of  every  other  English  Dominican 
foundation.  The  royal  support  was  greater  indeed  in  these 
two  instances  than  elsewhere ;  but  in  each  case  it  was  the 
Crown  that  bore  a  very  large  share  in  the  upkeep  of  the  friars. 
The  kings  one  by  one  had  their  personal  preferences  for  the 
way  the  offerings  should  be  made ;  but  in  whichever  way  and 
by  whichever  king  the  royal  offerings  still  made  up  the  chief 
source  of  income.  Henry  III  generally  made  a  present  of 
oaks  at  very  frequent  intervals,  sometimes  even  specifying 
their  purpose,  as  for  firewood3  or  building4  or  wharfs5  or 
boats.6  But  the  value  of  his  gifts  was  determined  by  the 
circumstances  of  the  friars,  for  it  was  during  his  reign  that 
most  of  the  houses  were  being  built,  and  even  after  their 
construction  repairs  were  at  first  extraordinarily  frequent. 
Churches  were  erected  and  then  discovered  to  be  wholly 
inadequate  for  the  huge  crowds  of  people  that  attended.  Put 
up  almost  on  the  very  arrival  of  the  friars,  these  buildings 
had  to  be  perpetually  altered,  perpetually  enlarged.  As  early  as 
1 241 7  Canterbury  had  to  increase  its  church,  and  at  Cambridge 
in  12408  the  graveyard  had  become  too  narrow  for  the  many 

1  Wills,  P.C.C.,  23  Home.  "  Ibid.,  18  Moone. 

3  P.R.O.  Rot.  Clans,  15  Hen.  Ill,  m.  8. 

4  Ibid.,  16  Hen.  Ill,  m.  10. 

5  Ibid.,  21  Ed.  I,  m.  5. 

6  Ibid.,  21  Hen.  Ill,  m.  10. 

7  P.R.O.  Rot.  de  Liberate,  25  Hen.  Ill,  m.  10. 

8  P.R.O.  Rot.  Clans,  24  Hen.  Ill,  m.  13. 


XLhc  ^foundations  13 

dead  who  were  laid  to  rest  within   echo   of  the  chant  and 
prayers  of  the  Dominicans.    For  all  these  reasons  building- 
materials  were  the  most  usual,  because  useful,  form  in  which 
the  royal  alms  were  made.    Edward  I  on  the  whole  set  to  work 
to  consolidate  his  father's  foundations,  so  that  he  was  not  so 
often  called  upon  for  wood  or  stone  or  lime.    His  charities 
most  ordinarily  consisted  of  pensions  to  Priories  or  to  indi- 
vidual friars  who  had  acted  as  confessors  to  him  or  to  one  or 
other  of  the  royal  children,  or  who  had  been  used  for  embassies 
to  foreign  courts.    But  another  way  in  which  this  thorough 
Englishman  gave  his  alms  was  in  food  to  the  various  com- 
munities close  by  whom  he  happened  to  be  passing.  Sometimes 
he  would  pay  for  three  days'  food,  sometimes  for  one.    The 
actual  sums  are  entered  in  the  Patent  Rolls,  and  also  in  many 
cases  the  number  of  friars  in  each  house  so  provided  for.    It 
appears  by  these  that  for  <\d.  a  mediaeval  friar  could  furnish 
himself  with  a  day's  monastic  fare.    Edward  II,  besides  his 
princely  benefaction  to  the  great  Priory  at  King's  Langley, 
most  ordinarily  followed  his  father's  custom  and  gave  alms  in 
kind.    Edward   III,    especially  at  the  commencement  of  his 
reign,  displayed  even  in  his  charities  his  personally  character- 
istic love  for  pomp  and  show.    In  his  account  books  are  noted 
time  after  time  moneys  paid  to  the  friars  of  this  Priory  or 
that  for  coming  out  to  meet  him  in  solemn  procession.    His 
largess  followed  his  favourite  passion.    Despite  all  his  short- 
comings,  Edward's  grandson,  the   second   Richard,   usually 
saw  life  from  a  higher  standpoint  than  his  predecessor.  Weak 
he  certainly  was,   in  that  he  did  not   coerce   his  turbulent 
barons ;    but   courage    he    always    possessed,   as    his    happy 
bearing  to  the  revolting  peasants  of  1389  abundantly  proved. 
Double-dealing  he  then  and  at  other  times  proved  to  be,  but 
his  advisers,  too,  especially  the  very  baronial    party  he  so 
hated,  must  bear  part  of  the  shame  of  his  fault,  and  especially 
of  his  broken  oaths,  for  he  violated  his  sworn  promise  not  in 
his  own  interests,  but  in  theirs.    Yet  he  was  genuinely  inter- 
ested in  religious  things,  said  daily  the  Divine  Office  according 
to  the  Dominican  rite,  and  struggled  as  best  he  could,  though 
frequently  with  little  success,  to  live    up   to    his  faith.    Con- 
sequently his  way  of  benefaction   was  to  bestow  alms  and 
offerings  at  Mass,   and  to  give    liberally  to    the    friars  who 
preached  to  him.  Sermons  he  appears  to  have  loved,  for  wher- 
ever he  moved  in  his  royal  progress  he  had  some  Dominican 
or  other  to  come  to  him  and  propound  the  mysteries  of  faith. 
This,  too,  was  the  fashion  both  of  Henry  IV  and  Henry  VI. 
Repeated  gifts  of  money  are  noted  in  the  royal  accounts  for 
sermons  preached  before  the   king   at   one  or   other  of  his 
palaces  or  hunting  lodges.  So  soldierly  a  sovereign  as  Henry  V 
did  not  patronize  the  court  preacher.    There  seems  no  record 
of  his  having  made  an  offering  for  any  such  purpose,  though 


14  Hbe  Englisb  Dominicans 

he  confirmed  all  the  pensions  of  his  predecessors,  and  thus  in 
reality  was  as  generous  to  the  friars  as  his  ancestors  had 
been.  Edward  IV,  Henry  VII,  and  Henry  VIII  continued  the 
plan  of  Henry  V,  gave  liberally  in  State  pensions,  but  did 
little  else  in  the  way  of  personal  gifts  to  the  building  or  upkeep 
or  general  support  of  house  or  church.  No  doubt  the  cause  of 
this  may  well  have  been  that  already  the  country  had  quite  as 
many  religious  houses  as  it  required,  quite  as  many  at  least 
as  it  could  support.  Indeed,  this  support  sometimes  itself 
languished  or  was  withheld. 

Still,  even  in  1505'  we  find  a  will,  in  which  Richard  Smewen, 
4 '  citezein  and  merchaunt  haberdassher  of  the  Citie  of  London  " 
bequeaths  "  to  the  freer  precheors  in  london  callid  the  blakke 
freers  toward  the  buildyng  of  their  cloister,  vil,  vjs,  viijd," 
which  implies  alterations  and  substantial  improvements 
still  continuing  to  the  sixteenth  century.  More  curious  than 
this  is  a  petition  of  the  Dominican  friars  of  Guildford2  to 
Henry  VIII  in  1537,  after  the  king  has  actually  broken  with 
Rome,  asking  him,  after  the  fashion  of  his  royal  predecessors, 
to  assist  them  with  some  permanent  grant.  Moreover,  itself 
a  curious  comment  on  the  supposed  Protestantism  of  Jane 
Seymour,  they  affirm  the  Priory  of  Guildford  to  be  now  "  your 
most  gracious  Queen  Jane's  foundation,"  though  itpiad  origin- 
ally been  due  in  the  first  instance  to  Queen  Eleanor,  the  wife  of 
Henry  III.5  The  friars  quite  openly  declared  that  charity  and 
alms  were  no  longer  so  plentiful  as  they  had  been  in  past 
times,  and  asked  for  some  sort  of  endowment,  in  return  for 
which,  of  course,  they  will  continue  to  pray  for  "  your  most 
princely  and  honourable  estate  to  reign,  prosper,  and  to  endure. 
Amen."  The  King  closed  the  royal  record  of  benefactions,  so 
conspicuous  in  England  during"  the  reigns  of  the  last  Plantage- 
nets,  with  the  sum  of  ^5/ 

But  it  should  not  be  supposed  that  the  success  of  the  friars, 
the  welcome  they  so  instantly  received  in  England,  was  of 
such  a  kind  as  to  save  them  from  all  molestations,  or  to  secure 
for  them  an  unassailable  position  in  the  kingdom.  Matthew 
Paris  has  already  been  quoted  for  his  denunciation  of  their 
encroachments  on  monastic  rights  and  privileges.  Coming- 
straight  from  abroad,  and  high  in  favour  with  Pope  and  King, 
the  Dominicans  certainly  appear  not  to  have  been  altogether 
tactful.  They  claimed  the  right  to  preach  and  to  confess 
without  any  leave  of  parish  priest  or  bishop,  and  based  these 
claims  on  papal  decrees,  which  in  their  literal  significance  could 
easily  bear  this  interpretation.  But  the  disputes  were  so  endless 
that  the  Holy  See  was  forced  in  1301  to  recall  all  its  privileges 

-  Wills,  P.C.C.,  37  Holgrave. 

2  Historical  Documents  {Exchequer),  1st  Series,  No.  350. 

3  Reliquary,  New  Series,  vol.  i  (Jan.  1887),  p.  8. 

4  Nicholas,  Privy  Purse  Expenses  of  Henry  VIII,  etc.,  p.  151. 


tlbe  jfoimfcaticms  15 

and  make  the  permission  of  bishop  and  rector  essential  for  the 
active  work  of  the  ministry.1 

The  other  religious  orders,  older  and  already  established, 
viewed  with  certain  misgivings  these  new  institutes,  which 
took  up  a  form  of  religious  life  already  condemned  officially 
by  their  rules.  To  the  Benedictine,  stability  or  life-long  resid- 
ence in  one  abbey  was  itself  as  sacred  a  means  to  perfection 
as  chastity  or  poverty  or  obedience;  exceptions  might  be 
suffered  for  the  purposes  of  missionary  enterprise,  but  these 
were  frankly  recognized  to  be  exceptions  requiring  especial 
sanctions.  For  the  friars  this  was  not  the  exception,  but  the 
rule.  They  looked  upon  themselves  as  spiritual  free-lances, 
tilting  all  the  world  over,  from  west  to  east,  at  every  form  of 
error  and  in  defence  of  every  truth.  No  monastic  enclosure 
forbade  their  free  movements,  the  very  choral  obligation  of 
chaunted  office  was  by  the  express  command  of  Saint  Dominic 
to  be  sacrificed  whenever  it  prevented  study  or  preaching. 
They  took  as  their  boast  what  Matthew  Paris  used  to  say  of 
them  with  scorn  :  ' '  That  the  whole  earth  was  their  cell  and  the 
ocean  was  their  cloister"  ("  Chron.  Maj.,"  v,  529). 

Their  first  energy  drew  to  them  the  better  kind  of  folk,  who 
really  desired  spiritual  awakening,  and  this  meant  in  the  end 
that  the  financial  status  of  the  other  orders  suffered.  In  1285  " 
the  Abbot  and  Chapter  of  Citeaux  complained  that  since  the 
Dominicans  and  Franciscans  had  gone  to  Scarborough  in  the 
face  of  papal  and  royal  prohibitions  the  revenues  of  their 
church  there,  which  hadbeen  given  them  expressly  that  it  might 
provide  for  a  three  days' maintenance  of  their  Chapter-General, 
had  so  diminished  that  it  could  hardly  support  them  for  one 
day. 

At  Dunstable  we  find  the  Augustinian  Canons  bitterly  op- 
posing the  entry  of  the  Dominicans.  Henry  III  asked  them 
kindly  to  help  these  favourites  of  his,  and  wrote  to  thank 
them  on  27  October  1259 3  for  their  welcome  of  the  friars; 
but  under  the  same  date  in  their  Chronicle  we  find  them 
angrily  protesting  against  this  unfair  rivalry,  and  in  12874 
they  purchased  through  Thomas  their  janitor  a  messuage 
precisely  in  order  to  prevent  the  Dominicans  from  enlarging 
their  homestead.  But  although  this  establishing  of  the  friars, 
however  displeasing  to  the  Canons,  had  been  done  with  the 
approval  of  the  King,  who  had  actually  written  to  the  Canons 
on  their  behalf,  it  is  described  by  Matthew  Paris  as  a  secret 
undertaking,  an  underhand  performance,  "a  secret  erection 
of  an  altar  and  saying  of  mass."5  This  instance  at  least, 
where  we  have  definite  knowledge  that  it  was  no  such  thing, 

1  Wilkins,  Concilia,  vol.  ii,  p.  257.  2  Rymer,  Foedera,  vol.i,  p.  661. 

3  P.R.O.  Rot.  Pat.,  43  Hen.  Ill,  m.  10. 

4  Annates  de  Dunstaptia  (R.  S.  Annales  Monastici,  III),  p.  336. 

5  Chron.  Major,  vol.  v,  p.  742. 


1 6  TTbe  lEnglisb  Dominicans 

makes  suspect  a  good  deal  of  the  criticism  of  this  picturesque 
chronicler.  He  had  rumour  only  to  go  by,  and  rumour  that 
reached  Benedictine  Abbeys  was  not  often  favourable  to  the 
friars.  Exceptions  there  were  like  Abbot  Thomas  and  the 
monks  of  St.  Augustine's,  Canterbury,  who  were  received 
to  the  fellowship  of  the  Order  by  the  Master-General  (Aymeric 
of  Placentia)  in  1307;1  they  shared  in  all  the  merits  of  the 
Dominicans,  and  at  death  the  Abbot  would  be  entitled  to  special 
prayers  on  account  of  his  "  especial  love  and  friendship." 

The  monks  of  Bristol  objected  to  the  Jacobin  friars  (a  title 
given  to  the  Dominicans  from  their  great  church  in  Paris 
dedicated  to  St.  James,  from  which  later,  as  the  scene  of  their 
assembly,  the  terrible  Jacobin  club  got  its  name)  settling 
there  in  1230,2  and  tried  to  prevent  the  Bishop  of  Worcester, 
in  whose  diocese  the  city  lay,  from  consecrating  their  church, 
or  from  allowing  .burials  and  offerings  to  be  made  there.  The 
bishop  steadily  refused  to  support  the  monks,  and  made  the 
Dominicans  welcome  through  all  the  country  that  was  under 
his  spiritual  jurisdiction.  Even  with  the  Franciscans  there 
was  occasional  bickering,  as  when  at  Oxford  they  quarrelled 
over  their  respective  observance  of  Poverty,  disputed  as  to 
which  of  the  rival  orders  should  have  precedence  in  the  Uni- 
versity processions.  The  Franciscans  naively  demanded  the 
right  to  the  first  place  because  of  their  greater  humility.3 

Sometimes,  however,  the  Dominicans  themselves,  when 
once  established,  forbade  the  arrival  of  other  friars.  Thus  in 
13864  a  royal  precept  ordained  that  their  privilege  should  be 
safeguarded,  whereby  no  mendicant  should  build  nearer  to 
them  than  300  ells,  a  privilege  threatened  at  Thetford;  while 
perhaps  they  were  answerable  for  Bishop  Stavensby's  refusal 
to  allow  the  Franciscans  to  settle  in  Chester5  in  1236,  lest 
their  arrival  should  imperil  the  already  existing  Dominican 
foundation  there.  Bishop  Grosseteste,  as  an  intimate  friend  to 
both  Orders,  wrote  to  protest,  asserting  that  both  flourished 
more  vigorously  when  existing  side  by  side,  since  no  doubt 
their  near  neighbourhood  spurred  each  to  fuller  activity.  Even 
the  Carmelites  fell  across  them  when,  in  1370,  John  Stokes, 
O.P.,6  a  Suffolk  man,  attacked  them  in  Cambridge,  denying 
their  antiquity  and  challenging  their  assertion  that  Elias  was 
their  founder.  But  he  was  always  a  contentious  fellow,  for 
though  he  was  got  out  of  England  to  save  unpleasantness,  he 
started  another  quarrel  in  Cologne7  over  some  theological 
controversy,  and  found  that  place  also  too  hot  for  him. 

1  Twysden  (1682),  Chronica  W.  Thorn,  col.  2008. 

2  Annals  of  Tewkesbury  (R.  S.  Annales  Monastici,  I),  p.  78. 

3  A.  G.  Little,  Grey  Friars  of  Oxford  (i8g2),  p.  75;  320-335. 

4  P.R.O.  Rot.  Pat.,  10  Rich.  II,  p.  1,  m.  3. 

6  Roberti  Grosseteste  Epistolae  (R.  S.),  p.  120. 

6  Echard,  Scriptores  Ord.  Prced.,  vol.  i,  p.  674. 

7  Fontana,  Monumenta  Dominicana,  p.  252. 


REMAIN'S  OF  BLACKFRIARS,  CANTERBURY 


[To  face  p.  16 


TIbe  jf emulations  17 

The  trouble  with  the  bishops  was  apparently  completely 
allayed  by  the  Constitution  of  Pope  Boniface  VIII  in  i30i,x 
whereby  it  was  ordained  that  for  the  hearing"  of  confessions 
permission  was  required  from  the  bishop,  and  for  preaching 
the  leave  of  the  parish  priest,  who  could  also  claim  a  quarter 
of  every  charitable  offering  made  to  the  friars.  On  13  June 
of  the  previous  year,  in  the  provincial  Synod  of  Canterbury, 
the  English  bishops  insisted  further  that  they  would  only 
license  such  friars  as  they  had  personally  examined,  and 
henceforward  episcopal  registers  are  full  of  the  names  of 
friars  so  licensed,  with  full  powers  to  absolve  even  in  reserved 
cases.  Foreign  Dominicans  in  England  came  under  this 
regulation  :  thus  Bishop  Wayneflete  of  Winchester,  on 
27  February  1468,  authorized  Jeremias  of  Bugella,  a  Lombard 
friar,  to  hear  the  confessions  of  the  large  Lombard  com- 
munity settled  at  the  great  port  of  Southampton.2 

With  the  religious,  who  were  rightly  or  wrongly  jealous  of 
them,  little  could  be  done  in  the  way  of  peace.  Time,  how- 
ever, healed  that  wound,  for  the  friars  eventually  became  as 
wedded  as  ever  the  monks  had  been  to  privilege,  upholding 
the  rights  of  settled  and  established  communities.  This, 
however,  was  not  till  their  quarrels  with  secular  and  regular 
clergy  had  done  much  to  lower  the  Church  in  the  eyes  of  the 
people.  That  sharp,  though  not  dishonest  critic,  the  author 
of  Piers  Plowman,  pointed  the  moral  at  the  end  of  the 
fourteenth  century: 

Unless  they  and  the  Church  keep  closer  together 
The  most  mischief  e'er  made  will  be  mounting  up  fast. 

Even  the  people  had  their  ground  of  quarrel  with  the  friars. 
With  them,  however,  it  was  no  question  of  teaching,  for  the 
tendency  of  all  the  mendicants  was  in  favour  of  the  class  from 
which  they  had  sprung.  Many  Dominicans  were,  indeed,  of 
good  families,  but  on  the  whole  it  was  an  aristocracy,  as 
they  boasted,  rather  of  talent  than  of  blood.  Cleverness  and 
not  heraldic  quarterings  gave  the  entry  to  their  cloister ;  hence 
far  more  than  the  monks  they  were  recruited  from  the  poorer, 
rural  and  town,  populations.  Therefore  we  find  them  heading 
some  of  the  bands  of  revolting  peasants  in  1389, 3  preaching 
a  levelling  doctrine  on  the  rights  and  duties  of  property 
which  both  the  author  of  Piers  Plowman  and  Wyclifte 
agreed  to  be  the  real  cause  (and  not  Lollardy)  of  that  great 
revolt.  These  two  both  saw  in  scholasticism,  in  Plato  and 
Aristotle,  the  origin  of  that  principle  of  Aquinas  which  de- 
clared the  actual  division  of  private  possessions  to  have  no 
sacred  sanction  of  immemorial  right,  but  simply  to  follow 
from  the  experience  of  the  race.    Friars  who  taught  England 

1  Wilkins,  Concilia,  vol.  ii,  p.  257;  Annales  de  Wigomia  (R.S.),  p.  545. 
a  Ex  registro  IV.    Wayneflete,  torn,  i,  fol.  92. 
3  Mediaeval  Socialism,  p.  39. 

C 


i  s  Ube  Englisb  Dominicans 

the  practical  use  of  the  theory  of  representation,  and  who 
could  chauntthat  democratic  charter,  The  Song  of  Lewes,  were 
not  likely  to  become  unpopular  in  their  social  and  political 
views.  But  where  they  came  to  blows  with  the  nation  was 
over  an  even  more  personal,  and,  to  Englishmen,  more  im- 
portant matter,  the  right  of  way.  Encroachments  on  that  are 
regarded  always  with  extreme  jealousy  by  the  populace  who 
will  often  be  silent  and  submissive  to  far  greater  tyranny.  It 
is  the  memory  of  enclosures,  a  memory  now  wholly  tradi- 
tional, that  has  stirred  among  our  own  generation  more 
hatred  against  the  landed  classes  than  any  other  act  of  greater 
tyranny,  and  enclosures  were  repeatedly  sanctioned  solemnly 
in  Parliament.  Therefore  it  is  not  to  be  wondered  at  that  the 
Dominicans  on  a  matter  so  sacred  to  the  hearts  of  the  people 
came  frequently  into  obloquy,  for  in  enlarging  their  home- 
stead, or  even  widening  or  lengthening  their  buildings,  they 
at  times  encroached  on  some  common  highwa)',  with  the 
result  that  the  people  had  to  substitute  a  long  way  round  for 
the  earlier  short  cut.  Of  all  these  controversies  we  may  single 
out  one,  which  deserves  to  be  handed  down  to  tradition  as  the 
Epic  of  Frog  Lane.  A  roadway  thus  pleasantly  named  lay 
close  to  the  Priory  of  Hereford,  and  was  coveted  by  the  friars 
for  the  enlargement  of  their  homestead.  In  1325  *  an  inquisi- 
tion was  held  to  discover  whether  or  not  this  would  cause 
hardship  to  anyone.  Twelve  men,  whose  names  are  recorded 
for  us,  on  22  August  asserted  that  such  an  encroachment 
would  not  be  prejudicial  to  the  King  (Edward  II),  but  would 
be  prejudicial  to  the  city,  since  it  was  the  common  access  for 
horses  and  carts,  and  had  so  been  time  out  of  mind.  In  1332 
this  was  solemnly  confirmed  by  Edward  III,  and  the  Dean 
and  Chapter  of  Hereford  the  more  heartily  concurred  since 
they  had  a  rent  from  the  lane,  and  thus  were  their  liberties 
damaged  by  the  friars  to  the  prejudice  of  their  charters  granted 
by  the  King  and  his  predecessors.  But  in  1334  the  Dominicans 
had  influence  enough  to  secure  a  new  inquisition  (on  which 
two  members  alone  of  the  previous  jury  served)  which  de- 
clared on  23  May  that  no  prejudice  to  King  or  city  could  arise 
from  the  occupation  of  the  lane  by  the  Preaching  Friars.  Six 
days  later,  before  the  new  inquisition  had  reached  the  Court, 
Edward  III  (shrewdly  suspecting,  or  it  may  be  certainly 
knowing  that  something  had  taken  place  more  advantageous 
to  the  friars)  sent  a  royal  mandate  to  the  Archbishop  of 
Canterbury,  who  was  also  the  Chancellor,  directing  him  to 
confirm  the  Dominican  possession  if  the  inquisition  should 
find  in  their  favour.  On  9  June  an  order  of  Council,  signed 
by  Edward  III  in  Newcastle,  ordered  that  nothing  further 
should  be  done  without  a  special  royal  mandate.  This  left  the 
friars  in  occupation  of  the  lane.    For  eighteen  years  there  was 

1  Reliquary,  vol.  xxiii  (July  1S82),  p.  18  sqq. 


Qhe  afounfcations  19 

a  pause  while  the  city  girded  itself  for  the  fight.  In  1352  a 
plea  was  urged  at  the  Assizes  against  Thomas  Rushook,  the 
prior,  and  six  friars  and  three  lay-brothers  by  name:  "  Since 
by  the  obstruction  of  Frog  Lane  people  living  on  that  side  of 
the  city  had  no  entry  to  it,  for  the  walls  of  the  Friars'  ground 
had  been  built  up  so  that  there  was  no  approach  for  the  cattle." 
This  was  on  16  April.  On  1  May,  to  escape  from  the  difficulty, 
the  Hereford  community  with  some  guile  presented  the  now 
famous  lane  to  the  King,  who  promptly,  as  they  had  in- 
tended, re-granted  it  to  them  on  20  May.  The  town  answered 
by  demanding  a  new  inquisition.  The  bailiff  of  the  friars, 
John  Palet,  in  reply,  quoted  the  original  royal  grant,  which 
included  a  rent  to  the  King  of  20s.  a  year,  and  in  virtue  of 
this  evidence  of  royal  ownership,  Edward  issued  a  mandate 
to  stay  any  further  proceedings,  as  he,  a  party  to  any  claim, 
had  not  first  been  consulted  by  the  city.  In  1354,  on  9  August, 
Hereford  repeated  its  plea  of  1352,  to  which  the  King  answered 
by  pardoning  any  irregularities  on  the  part  of  the  friars,  and 
demanding  in  exchange  a  rent  of  ^20  from  Frog  Lane,  which 
had  apparently,  like  unearned  increment,  as  the  centre  of  all 
this  struggle  gone  up  in  value.  For  another  thirty  years 
silence  once  more  settled  down  over  the  lane,  though  the  friars 
must  have  long  wearied  of  their  heavy  rent.  But  Edward's 
treasury,  exhausted  by  ceaseless  war,  and,  later,  by  his  hope- 
less extravagance,  did  not  seem  likely  to  give  up  any  possible 
source  of  revenue.  However,  in  1386,  on  24  August,  exactly 
sixty-one  years  to  within  two  days  from  the  date  of  the  first 
inquisition,  the  King  granted  to  the  priory,  in  pure  and  per- 
petual alms,  all  the  houses  and  lands  which  it  held  in  Hereford. 
Thus,  without  mention  of  its  name,  Frog  Lane  came  finally 
to  be  held  freely,  without  opposition  or  rent,  by  the  Black 
Friars  of  Hereford. 

Elsewhere  they  were  not  so  fortunate;  but  whether  success- 
ful or  not,  indeed,  even  more  thoroughly  where  they  were 
successful,  the  friars  must  have  lost  enormously  in  popular 
estimation.  Commissions  of  oyez  and  terminer  are  frequently 
met  with,  appointed  in  places  like  Boston  and  Derby,  to  assess 
the  damages  done  to  the  priory  by  some  riotous  mob  which 
burst  in  and  broke  open  doors  and  windows,  and  beat  the 
unfortunate  friars,  and  went  off  with  wood  and  stone,  and 
even  once  the  very  shutters,  to  the  value  of  100.?.  This  shows 
some  want  of  popularity,  arising  most  probably  from  some  such 
obstruction  as  happens  to  be  described  with  detailed  evidence 
in  the  Epic  of  Frog  Lane. 

The  only  other  evidence  of  any  unpopularity  comes  from 
the  literature  of  the  mediaeval  times.  Certainly  the  tales  of 
Chaucer  alone  are  evidence  enough  of  this,  for  there  is  hardly 
a  friar  there  at  all  who  can  be  considered  in  any  sense  as  a  man 
of  God.    Their  repute  must  indeed  have  been  bad  when  so 


20  Ube  Enolteb  Dominicans 

well-travelled  an  Englishman  could  venture  consistently  to 
speak  ill  of  them.  There  are  poems,  too,  popular  and  caustic, 
many  of  which  can  be  found  in  Wright's  collection  of  English 
songs,  which  describe  much  the  same  sort  of  friar,  stupid,  and 
thoroughly  wicked.  It  would  certainly  not  be  fair  to  put  all 
this  aside  and  point  to  the  friars  as  the  idealized  apostles  which 
we  are  led  sometimes  to  imagine  them  to  have  been-  A  voca- 
tion such  as  theirs  was  indeed  a  far  harder  life  than  that  of 
the  monk  or  the  canon,  at  least  in  this,  that  their  temptations 
were  considerably  more.  After  the  Black  Death,  when  so  many 
unworthy  people  found  a  ready  entrance  into  religious  life,  it 
was  bad  enough  that  cloistered  precincts  should  be  invaded 
by  men  unable  to  live  up  to  their  high  calling  ;  but  when  this 
type  of  religious  became  a  friar,  and  had  no  longer  the  external 
decorum  of  a  monastery  to  shield  and  defend  him  from  himself, 
when  he  was  sent  in  pursuance  of  his  actual  vocation  to  wander 
over  all  England  from  village  to  village,  from  house  to  house, 
preaching,  instructing,  confessing,  it  was  obvious  that  weak- 
ness could  not  for  long  hold  out  against  the  constant  strain  of 
work  with  hardly  any  of  the  safeguards  of  monastic  observ- 
ance. All  over  Europe  a  decline  was  apparent.  Domestic 
historians,  the  encyclicals  of  the  Master-Generals,  the  letters 
of  St.  Catherine  of  Siena  are  all  at  one  in  demonstrating 
this  terrible  state  of  affairs.  Only  in  England,  as  we  shall  see 
later,  the  Superiors  of  the  Order  certainly  made  an  attempt  to 
pull  things  together  and  set  to  work  to  re-establish  the  fervour 
and  discipline  that  had  previously  existed. 

Yet  it  is  something  that  even  Wycliffe  at  first  loudly  praised 
the  friars  when  he  began  to  tilt  at  the  extreme  luxury  of  the 
secular  priesthood  and  the  monks,  and  he  actually  alluded  in 
some  of  his  earlier  writings  to  the  "  glorious"  St.  Francis 
and  his  zealous  sons.  His  own  preachers,  moreover,  adopted 
the  garb  of  the  Franciscan  and  the  ideals  of  life  of  the 
Dominican.  It  was  only  when  he  started  to  revolt  from  Rome, 
the  last  and  least  popular  stage  of  his  career,  that  he  was  led 
to  denounce  the  friars,  who  were  naturally  the  incessant 
champions  of  Papal  prerogative,  since  their  world-wide  organi- 
zation and  their  special  privileges  depended  absolutely  on  the 
over-lordship  of  the  Pope. 

It  cannot,  however,  be  denied  that  the  reputation  of  the 
friars  as  a  whole  sank  considerably  from  the  Black  Death 
onwards  for  about  a  hundred  years,  from  the  reign  of 
Edward  III  to  the  reign  of  Henry  V.  But  the  rise  of  Lollardy 
and  the  strenuous  opposition  which  it  provoked  seems  to  have 
had  a  beneficial  effect  upon  the  Dominicans,  for  from  that  time 
on  begins  again  the  testimony  of  popular  favour.  The  lists  of 
wills  prove  all  over  England  a  recovery  by  the  friars  of  the 
good  esteem  of  the  people.  Tradesfolk,  who  were  then  holding 
a  considerable  place  in  material  affairs,  were  prodigal  of  their 


XCbe  foundations  21 

wealth  to  the  friars,  erecting-  chantry  chapels,  leaving  their 
bodies  for  burial  in  churchyard  or  cloister  or  church,  having 
Masses  said  for  their  souls,  Masses  in  perpetuity  or  trentals. 
Sometimes  individual  Dominicans  are  named,  evidently  a  rela- 
tion or  confessor  whose  words  had  been  of  help.  Sometimes, 
again,  the  bequest  takes  the  practical  form  of  the  benefactor's 
own  commercial  produce,  as  when  on  24  November  15041 
Henry  Thabor,  "  Citezein  and  Fisshemonger  of  London," 
bequeaths  "  unto  the  blak  friers  within  Ludgate  of  London 
xxs.  and  a  barell  of  white  Heryng  and  a  Cade  of  rede  Hering 
to  the  intent  that  they  shall  (say)  dirige  and  a  Trentall  of 
masses,"  and  on  31  July  1479  William  Steede,  a  wine  mer- 
chant, leaves  them  "  forty  gallons  of  good  red  wine."2 

The  list  of  wills  is  interesting  in  this,  that  it  shows  how 
widespread  among  all  ranks  of  society  was  the  desire  to  be 
connected  with  the  Dominicans,  and  this  in  consequence 
implied  a  trust  in  the  value  of  their  prayers  and  devotions. 
Among  others  are  Barons  of  the  Exchequer,  clerks  "of  the 
Remembraunces  in  the  King's  Eschequier  at  Westminster," 
"kepars  of  the  King's  Exchange  and  money  and  cunage 
within  his  Tour  of  London,"  rectors  of  churches,  deans  of 
St.  Paul's,  bishops  and  cardinals,  mayors  of  London  and  of 
other  cities  and  towns,  knights  and  lords  and  aldermen, 
citizens,  labourers,  widows,  princes,  and  kings  and  queens. 
Nor  was  it  only  when  death  was  near  in  approach  that  their 
benefactions  began,  for  all  along  the  centuries  are  the  names 
of  people  who  gave  messuages  or  rents  or  food  to  one  or 
other  of  the  priories  of  the  English  Dominicans.  The  Mayor 
of  Lynn  makes  a  gift  of  wine  to  that  convent  for  St.  Dominic's 
day  1285.3  But  of  course  the  royal  donations  outnumber  in 
importance  and  generosity  all  the  other  benefactions  to  which 
in  course  of  centuries  the  Dominicans  succeeded.  Yet  in  return 
the  kings  and  queens  demanded  the  alms  of  prayers.  Edward  I4 
was  always  most  regular  in  presenting  petitions  to  the  General 
Chapters  to  ask  for  the  pious  remembrance  of  the  fathers  for 
himself  and  his  family  and  the  kingdom,  and  this  good  practice 
his  son  continued.  In  13145  Edward  II  repeated  this  petition, 
mentioning  himself,  his  queen,  his  kingdom,  Prince  Edward, 
and  the  royal  affairs.  But  political  events  changed  from  time 
to  time  the  wording  of  this  request,  and  the  actual  names 
given  naturally  vary  considerably.  In  1326s  the  king  recom- 
mended himself  to  the  Provincial  Chapter  of  Oxford  on  6 
September,  and  for  the  first  time  omitted  the  names  of  his  wife 
and  son,  who  had  fled  beyond  the  seas  to  Mortimer,  and  were, 
as  perhaps  he  sadly  knew,  to  return  within  a  few  months  and 

1  Wills,  P.C.C.,  24  Holgrave.  2  Wills,  C.C.L.,  274  fol.  Wilde. 

3  Blomefield,  History  of  County  of  Norfolk,  etc.,  vol.  ii,  p.  527. 

*  P.R.O.  Rot.  Claus.,  3  Edw.  II,  m.  10  dorso. 

5  Ibid.,  7  Ed.  II,  m.  5  dorso.  "  Ibid.,  20  Ed.  II,  m.  11  dorso. 


22  Qftc  j£nQ\\sb  H)omtnicans 

drive  him  from  his  throne,  though  he  could  happily  not  have 
foreseen  the  unspeakable  terrors  of  Berkeley- Castle.  By  Feb- 
ruary of  1327 '  Edward  III  had  succeeded,  hardly  more  than 
a  boy.  He  had  as  yet  no  family,  and  so  his  petition  was  for 
himself,  for  Isabella,  the  queen  mother,  and  her  children. 
By  133 1 2  he  had  now  intentions  of  his  own,  and  had  no  further 
thought  for  Isabella,  who  was  in  her  State  prison  for  years  yet 
to  come.  He  spoke  only  of  himself,  Philippa  his  queen,  and 
Edward,  his  first-born  child.  By  13773  the  queen  had  gone,  and 
though  another  had  begun  to  occupy  his  mind  and  enfeeble  his 
senses,  still  his  memory  reverted  to  the  happier  and  earlier 
days,  so  that  he  granted  henceforth  in  perpetuity  ,-£20  a  year  to 
the  Provincial  Chapter,  that  a  Mass  be  said  for  the  repose  of 
her  soul.  Succeeding  sovereigns  confirmed  this  annual  grant, 
and  added  thereto  in  perpetual  memory  their  own  names  and 
the  names  of  their  queens  and  children. 

The  final  test  perhaps  of  the  worth  and  popularity  of  the 
friars  would  be  tabulated  statistics  of  the  numbers  that  joined 
them.  But  of  this  there  is  no  real  possibility  at  present.  By  the 
Reformation  there  were  fifty-three  houses  in  England,  besides 
many  others  in  Scotland  and  Ireland,  in  both  of  which 
countries,  until  almost  the  eve  of  the  Reformation,  the  Friar 
Preachers  came  under  the  jurisdiction  of  the  English  Provincial. 
Fifty-three  houses  required  much  garrisoning  out  of  the  small 
population  that  then  represented  the  English  nation.  It  has 
been  calculated  that  at  the  highest  estimate  there  cannot  have 
been  in  any  one  year  more  than  two  and  a  quarter  million 
males  in  England  up  to  the  Black  Death.  From  this  must  be 
deducted  the  number  of  secular  priests  and  the  huge  population 
of  the  abbeys,  some  of  which  absorbed  (as  Rievaulx  is  sup- 
posed to  have  done)  about  800  monks,  including  the  lay- 
brothers  required  for  the  full  farming  work  of  the  great 
Yorkshire  houses  that  ran  almost  half  of  the  wool  trade  of  the 
country.  Hence  it  is  not  to  be  supposed  that  these  Dominican 
priories  could  really  keep  up  their  list  of  many  friars.  At  first, 
in  the  rush  and  enthusiasm  of  the  new  spiritual  life,  people  in 
numbers  and  of  high  attainments  came  to  the  bands  of 
preachers.  Bishop  Mauclerk  of  Carlisle,  after  his  disgrace  at 
Court,  renounced  his  See  and  settled  as  a  Dominican  in 
Oxford.  Matthew  Paris  mentions  with  disgust  an  abbot  of 
Romsey  and  several  Benedictine  priors  who  gladly  entered 
the  ranks  of  these  Dominicans/  Many  of  the  nobility  had 
relations  in  the  Order,  though  very  few  friars  with  titles  are 
known  by  name,  except  perhaps  Friar  Bartholomew,  an 
English  Dominican,   who  was  made  a  Papal  Chamberlain, 

1  P.R.O.  Rot.  Claus.,  1  Ed.  Ill,  p.  1,  m.  9  dorso. 
a  Ibid.,  5  Ed.  Ill,  p.  1,  m.  29  dorso. 

3  P.R.O.  Rot.  Pat,  1  Hen.  VI,  p.  3,  m.  15,  no.  37. 

4  Chron.  Major,  iv,  511  etc. ;  Bullarium  Ord.  Praed.,  i,  220,  253. 


XTbe  ff  emulations  23 

allowed  to  accept  a  bishopric  if  it  were  ever  offered  him,  and 
permitted  to  speak  at  mealtime,  and  is  described  in  the  Bulls 
granting-  these  favours  as  the  natural  son  of  King  John  "of 
illustrious  memory." 

At  King's  Langley  ioo  religious  were  supported  during  the 
reign  of  Edward  II ;  thenceafter  sixty.  At  Holborn  and  Lud- 
gate  we  hear  of  eighty.  Gloucester  is  mentioned  as  having 
thirty,  Leicester  as  twenty-five,  and  so  on  throughout.  But 
it  is  not  easy  to  know  whether  these  figures  were  regularly 
maintained  even  up  to  the  Black  Death.  From  a  comparative 
study  of  the  houses  of  which  we  know  the  populations  about 
1300,  there  must  have  been  close  on  2,000  Friar  Preachers  in 
England,  and,  in  conjunction  with  Scotland  and  Ireland,  the 
Province  perhaps  numbered  about  3,000  members.  But  then, 
of  course,  the  English  Province  was  the  largest  in  the  Order, 
for  the  provincial  ruled  over  more  than  100  convents,  a 
majority  of  twenty  or  thirty  over  any  other  province. 

When  during  the  Reformation  we  are  given  the  list  of 
names  of  those  members  of  the  communities  who  signed  the 
royal  supremacy  oath,  or,  at  least,  handed  over  their  posses- 
sions to  the  Crown,  the  numbers  have  so  far  fallen  that  few 
convents  give  more  than  a  dozen  members.  It  is  possible  that 
there  were  some  who  did  not  sign,  who  fled  at  the  approach 
of  such  disaster.  It  is  possible,  but  not  likely,  for  no  mention 
or  record  is  made  of  such  dissenting  friars.  We  may  well 
believe  that  a  decrease  in  fervour  spelt  also  a  decrease  in 
numbers. 

The  century  of  foundations  welcomed  the  Dominicans  into 
England  with  a  success  and  an  advance  that  no  other  country 
in  Europe  could  rival.  Nowhere  else  had  they  so  quickly  so 
many  priories.  Perhaps  the  native  love  of  preaching  and  of 
good  sermons  made  them  so  popular. 

Chief  of  all,  the  Crown  made  them  generous  benefactions 
and  allayed  all  anxiety  for  the  financial  upkeep  of  such  sudden 
success.  It  is  no  wonder  that  the  English  Provincial  was  up- 
braided by  the  General  Chapter  of  London  in  1250  for  his 
interminable  buildings:  "We  ordain  to  the  Prior  Provincial 
of  England  5  days  on  bread  and  water,  5  psalters,  5  masses, 
5  disciplines,  and  let  him  meddle  less  in  building."1 

1  Reichert,  Acta  Capitulorum  Generalium  Ord.  Praed.  (1898,  Rome), 
vol.  i,  p.  54. 


CHAPTER  II 
THE  PRIORY 

THE  definite  form  taken  by  a  Dominican  priory  in 
pre-Reformation  days  can  be  reconstructed  with 
almost  absolute  accuracy.  It  is  evident,  for  in- 
stance, that  the  saying  of  the  Divine  Office  by  day 
and  night,  the  purpose  for  which  the  Order  had 
been  founded,  and  the  manners  and  customs  of  the  friars  would 
have  determined  to  a  certain  extent  something  of  the  arrange- 
ments of  the  buildings.  To  this  must  always  be  added  the 
realization  that  already  in  the  tradition  of  Christendom  a 
monastery  or  priory  had  its  ceremonial  of  life  and  its  symbolic 
ordering  of  which  experience  had  proved  the  convenience, 
varying  slightly  according  to  the  particular  end  each  religious 
community  had  as  the  purpose  of  its  existence.  Moreover, 
besides  such  general  considerations  as  these,  there  survives 
in  England  sufficient  evidence  to  show  exactly  how  these 
Dominican  convents  were  arranged.  Surveys  of  the  sites, 
dating  from  the  years  of  the  Dissolution  and  after,  were 
compiled  in  the  interest  of  government  or  of  the  local  tenants, 
and  by  a  careful  study  of  them  a  considerable  amount  of  infor- 
mation can  be  gathered.  There  are  sometimes  even  actual 
remains,  which,  though  always  fragmentary,  often  help  out  the 
vague  descriptions  of  the  surveyor,  and  give  definite  forms, 
sizes,  and  shapes  to  what  had  else  been  mere  imaginative 
guesswork.  Even  wills,  with  their  bequests  and  their  detailed 
descriptions  of  burial  places  often,  as  with  a  sudden  glimpse, 
illumine  passages  otherwise  obscure.  Finally,  in  contemporary 
literature  (as  in  Piers  the  Plowman's  Crede),  descriptions 
are  sometimes  met  with  which  set  before  the  reader  with 
the  deft  touch  of  life  the  thronging  and  crowded  homes  of  these 
earlier  sons  of  St.  Dominic. 

The  outward  appearance  of  such  a  priory  would  have  been 
largely  hidden  from  a  visitor  by  a  considerable  precinct,  en- 
closed by  a  high  stone  wall,  pierced  by  gates.  This  larger 
enclosure  circled  the  whole  site,  and  marked  off  completely 
the  actual  boundary  of  the  religious  establishment.  Sometimes 
it  appears  to  have  been  so  large  in  extent  as  to  have  included 
within  it  the  cemetery ;  but  ordinarily  this  would  have  been 
outside  the  precinct.  Within  this  wider  limit  would  be  a 
smaller  and  stricter  enclosure,  which  consisted  simply  of  the 
monastic  buildings  pure  and  simple,  even  to  the  exclusion  of 
the  guest  house,  where  in  the  more  important  priories  even 
women  were  sometimes  lodged.  This  narrower  enclosure  had, 
by  canonical  decree,  but  one  entrance  and  exit,  so  that  each 
who  came  and  wrent  would  have  to  pass  the  scrutiny  of  the 
brother  porter.  His  dwelling  was  a  cell  by  the  south-west 
corner  of  the    church,    so  constructed  that    he   could   from 

*4 


[To  face  p   24 


Zhc  priors  25 

his  place  of  daily  work  attend  to  such  callers  as  rang  at 
the  bell  and  yet  witness  the  various  functions  and  ceremonies 
in  the  church,  for  though  not  destined  to  say  the  Divine 
Office  in  choir,  being  what  is  called  a  lay-brother,  he  had  to 
be  present  at  Mass,  Compline,  and  the  greater  liturgical 
offices,  as  part  of  the  effective  expression  of  the  Dominican 
spirit.  Afterthedissolution  part  of  the  Ludgate  Blackfriarswas 
granted  to  Lord  Cobham,  and  in  the  deed  mention  is  made  of 
"  a  certain  window  called  the  Closet -window  looking  out  into 
the  Church  there."1  This  was  evidently  the  look-out  from  the 
porter's  cell.  In  Ludgate,  too,  a  long  corridor  ran  down  from 
his  cell  to  the  gate,  which  gave  on  to  the  road,  so  that  he  had 
a  corridor  of  about  fifty  feet  along  which  to  pass  to  answer 
the  bell.*  At  Ipswich,  in  1746,  there  still  remained  a  consider- 
able passage  across  an  open  space  between  the  precinct  wall 
and  what  had  been  the  porter's  lodge,  for  though  the  priory 
by  then  had  become  a  hospital  it  kept  untouched  the  full  plan 
of  its  earlier  use.  Norwich,  where  the  City  Corporation  have 
very  generously  spent  much  money  on  restoring  what  was  left 
of  the  beautiful  Dominican  Priory  and  in  laying  bare  the  site  of 
what  had  been  the  quadrangle,  had  apparently  much  the  same 
arrangement.  This  is  also  suggested  in  the  lease  of  1526  by 
the  community  of  Haverfordwest  Priory  to  Friar  Maurice  Jones 
of  "  a  chamber  over  the  church  gate  next  the  street."3 

The  mass  of  actual  building  would  appear  to  have  been  long 
and  low,  though  probably  broken  by  towers  and  turrets  so  as 
to  prevent  too  heavy  an  effect.  By  Papal  ordinance  some  200 
paces  had  to  separate  them  from  every  other  building,  but 
this  was  secured  chiefly  by  the  precinct,  which  effectively  pre- 
vented it  from  suffering  from  the  normal  overcrowding  of 
mediaeval  towns.*  On  two  stories  only  was  the  priory  allowed 
to  be  raised.  Indeed,  even  the  actual  height  had  been  deter- 
mined from  the  beginning  of  the  Order,  for  the  early 
constitutions  fixed  twenty  feet  as  the  elevation  of  the  house 
and  thirty  feet  as  that  of  the  church  ;  but  this  ordinance  cannot 
have  been  at  all  rigorously  enforced.  Matthew  Paris'  particu- 
larly lays  stress  on  the  gorgeous  palaces  which  housed  the 
friars  in  England,  and  his  accusation  is  amply  borne  out  by  the 
General  Chapter  of  the  Order  held  at  Holborn  in  1 250,  in  which, 
as  we  have  noted,  the  English  Provincial  was  severely  penanced 
for  his  architectural  extravagances. 

At  the  same  assembly  the  prior  of  the  Dominicans  at  New- 
castle was  summarily  ejected  from  office,  since  he,  too,  had 

1  Archaeologia ,  vol.  lxiii,  p.  76.  For  Crede  of  Piers  Plowman,  cf. 
E.  E.  T.  S.,  vol.  xxx. 

2  Ibid.,  pp.  61  and  75. 

3  P.R.O.  Ministers' Accounts,  30-31  Hen.  VIII,  No.  189. 

1  Bullarium,  vol.  i,  pp. 253-254;  Analccta  Ord.  Praed.,  1896,  p.  646,  and 
1897,  p.  98. 

3   Chron.  Major,  vol.  iv,  p.  280. 


26  Zbc  iSnQlish  Dominicans 

dabbled  in  building-  ventures,  and  that  in  a  time  of  much 
scarcity,  so  that  his  extravagance  seemed  likely  to  ruin  all 
the  prospects  of  the  priory  by  the  huge  proportions  of  the 
debt  incurred. 

On  one  side  of  the  mass  of  buildings,  sometimes,  as  we 
have  noted,  in  the  precinct,  would  have  been  the  cemetery. 
To  possess  so  ample  a  space  as  this  was  possible  for  the 
friars  just  because,  as  new  arrivals,  they  could  only  build 
their  convents  on  the  edge  of  the  crowded  town,  more  often 
than  not  being  obliged,  under  royal  favour,  to  pull  down  part 
of  the  city  walls  so  as  to  find  room  for  themselves  within  it. 
The  cemetery  was  much  valued  by  the  faithful  as  a  place  of 
burial,  since  it  seemed  to  bring  even  the  dead  within  the 
sanctifying  influence  of  religious  observance;  but  it  was  other 
purposes  than  that  which  made  it  necessary  for  the  friars  to 
have  an  open  space  near  the  priory,  since  here  usually  was 
the  preaching-cross  or  outside  pulpit  which  enabled  the  friars 
to  attract  a  far  larger  concourse  of  people  than  the  limits  of 
their  narrow  Gothic  churches  would  have  permitted.  It  is  for 
this  reason,  presumably,  and  not  because  of  an  enormous 
increase  of  burials,  that  within  five  years  of  their  establish- 
ment the  Dominicans  of  Bristol,  and  within  nine  j'ears  those  of 
Cambridge,1  had  to  extend  their  cemetery.  As  a  proof  of  this 
practice  of  churchyard  preaching  we  may  note  how,  in  1410, 
Roger  Jaket  of  London  desired  to  be  buried  "in  the  Church- 
yard near  the  pulpit  there,"2  while  William  Thorley  in  1431 
wished  his  body  to  be  laid  "before  the  Cross  in  the  Church- 
yard " ; 3  and  among-  the  list  of  obits  of  the  Blackfriars  at 
Bristol  is  the  name  of  William  Curtis,  who  is  described  as 
having  erected  a  cross  there.4  Such  a  cross  and  pulpit  are  also 
alluded  to  in  a  manuscript  of  anecdotes  for  sermons  compiled 
by  a  Cambridge  Dominican  in  the  middle  of  the  thirteenth 
century  (British  Museum,  Royal  7,  D.  i,  ff.  61-139^).  Two  of 
the  stories  that  this  good  friar  quotes  were  "told  me  by  the 
Lord  William,  Cardinal  and  legate  of  our  Lord  the  Pope  in 
Norway,  when  he  passed  through  Cambridge  in  his  sermon 
in  the  cemetery  of  the  Friars  Preachers."  Indeed,  there  is 
one  of  these  pulpits  actually  existing  at  Hereford,  though  it 
has  been  of  late  years  considerably  restored:  in  it  a  cross 
gracefully  surmounts  the  covered  hexagonal  pulpit  of  carved 
stone.  This  was  evidently  the  common  form  in  Dominican 
churchyards,  for  Piers  the  Plowman's  Creed  describes  it  as 
a  "  curious  cros  craftly  entayled  with  tabernacles  y-tight,  to 
toten  all  abouten."  Here,  too,  within  the  precinct  of  the 
burial  place  was  the  Ankar  house,  a  not  infrequent  adjunct  of 

1  P.R.O.  P.  R.,  17  Hen.  Ill,  m.  8;  R.  C,  24  Hen.  Ill,  m.  13. 

2  Sharpe,  Calendar  of  Witts  proved  and  enrolled  in  Court  of  Hustings, 
London,  A.D.  12^8-1688,  vol.  i,  p.  391. 

3  C.C.L.,  271  fol.  More.  *  Reliquary,  April  1888,  p.  76. 


Ubc  priory  27 

English  Dominican  life.  Sometimes  a  man,  sometimes  a 
woman,  seems  to  have  lived  in  a  round  tower  or  "pyler," 
and  there  perhaps  to  have  prayed  for  the  welfare  of  the  hos- 
pitable friars.  We  find  these  hermits  within  the  Dominican 
precincts  also  at  Newcastle,  Dartford,  and  Salisbury. 

Directly  then  to  the  north  lay  the  church.  This  plan  was 
favoured  asholdingthe  wind  off  the  living- part  of  the  priory,  and 
securing-  for  the  dormitory,  cloisters,  and  guest-house  the  early 
and  later  sun.  Its  size  varied  considerably  according  to  the  im- 
portance of  the  site  and  the  munificence  of  the  founder;  but 
it  is  noticeable  that  as  the  centuries  passed  there  was  a  natural 
tendency  to  increase  the  size  and  richness  of  the  buildings. 
The  great  church  of  the  Blackfriars  in  Ludgate,  begun  in 
1279,  was  220  feet  by  66  j1  their  church  at  Norwich,  com- 
pleted in  1470,  was  265  feet  by  65.'  Indeed,  Norwich  seems 
a  very  excellent  example  of  what  was  perpetually  happening, 
for  in  1440,  when  the  new  church  was  begun,  the  whole  of 
the  older  church  became  merely  a  chancel  or  choir,  so  great 
in  the  interval  of  200  years  had  the  ambitions  of  the  friars 
grown. 

The  choir,  where  the  friars  assembled  to  sing  their  Divine 
Office,  would  ordinarily  have  been  shut  off  from  the  main 
bod)'  of  the  church  by  a  heavy  screen,  hiding  from  sight  even 
the  high  altar.  In  assessing  the  damages  committed  by  the 
mob  at  Exeter  in  1302,  when  they  burst  into  the  Blackfriars' 
church,  mention  is  made  of  their  having  broken  down  the 
"partitions  before  the  Altars."3  Here,  at  the  high  altar, 
whatever  might  be  the  continental  custom,  the  English 
Dominicans  of  the  early  period  seem  to  have  reserved  the 
Blessed  Sacrament,  not  at  any  separate  tabernacle  or  side 
chapel,  but  within  the  precincts  of  the  choir  and  on  the  prin- 
cipal altar.  Reginald  Harrison  in  1458 4  directed  that  his  body 
was  to  be  buried  in  the  Blackfriars  of  Norwich,  "in  the 
presence  of  the  Blood  and  Body  of  Christ,"  and  in  Warwick, 
in  1495, 5  the  will  of  Edmund  Verney  explains  clearly  where- 
abouts in  the  Dominican  church  the  Blessed  Sacrament  was 
reserved:  "  I  will  that  my  executors  cause  a  lamp  to  be  con- 
tinually maintained  burning  in  the  Chancel  of  that  Church, 
before  the  Host."  Indeed,  Dominican  writers  of  the  thirteenth 
century  mention,  as  a  proof  of  the  beauty  of  the  choral  recita- 
tion of  the  Divine  Office,  that  it  was  said  in  the  presence  of 
the  Blessed  Sacrament.0  In  any  case  the  vessel  which  held 
the  Sacred  Species  would  have  been  draped,  for  frequently  in 

1  Merry  England,  No.  79,  p.  355.  -  Reliquary,  Oct.  1888,  p.  210. 

3  P.R.O.  R.  P.,  30  Ed.  I,  m.  36  dorso. 

*  Kirkpatrick,  History  of  Religious  Orders,  etc.,  in  Norwich,  p.  131. 
s   Transactions  of  Birmingham  and  Midland  Institute,  1880,  p.  8. 
6  Re'ichert,  Acta  Cap.  Gen.,  vol.  i,  p.  47;  Humbertusde  Romanis,  Opera 
Omnia  (1S88,  Fribourg-),  vol.  ii,  p.  170. 


28  zbc  Bnglisb  Dominicans 

the  inventories  of  the  Houses  suppressed  at  the  Dissolution 
occurs  the  item:  "  Canapey  over  the  Sacrament."1  But  at 
Mass  time  the  screen-doors  separating  nave  and  chancel  would 
have  been  flung-  wide  open,  and  thus  allowed  the  people  (in 
the  touching-  phrase  of  the  Middle  Ages  for  hearing  Mass)  to 
"see  their  Maker."  Naturally,  as  devotion  toHhe  Blessed 
Sacrament  increased,  the  lay-folk  grew  impatient  of  this 
hiding.  The  altar  was  brought  forward,  and  behind  it  the 
choir  was  pushed.  But  this  was  only  about  the  sixteenth 
century,  and  it  is  not  clear  that  any  such  arrangement  was 
ever  to  be  found  in  the  English  Dominican  churches.  Over 
the  screen  hung  the  great  rood.  In  1504  William  Batyson  2 
in  his  will  expressed  his  wish  to  be  buried  "in  the  body  of 
the  Church  before  the  High  Crucifix,"  and  Richard  Mynar  of 
Warwick  (151 1)  sought  the  same  place  for  his  internment: 
"Within  this  religious  house  afore  the  Rode  lofte."3  The 
Pleasant  Song  between  Plain  Truth  and  Blind  Ignorance 
(Deloney's  Garland  of  Good  Will,  1 585-1600),  one  of  the  few 
poems  that  survive  describing  from  the  Catholic  point  of  view 
the  dissolution  of  the  monasteries,  gives  this  same  appear- 
ance of  the  choir  screen: 

Oh  hold  thy  peace,  we  pray  thee, 

The  noise  was  passing-  trim, 
To  hear  the  Vriers  zinging 

As  we  did  enter  in : 
And  then  to  zee  the  rood-loft 

Zo  brawely  zet  with  zaints 
And  now  to  zee  them  wandring 

My  heart  with  zorrow  faints. 

And  the  accounts  of  the  parish  of  S.  Mary  Magdalen  (32  Hen. 
VIII)  at  Oxford,  record  this  item:  "Paid  for  taking  downe 
of  Rode  at  the  Black  Fryars,  with  Marye  and  John  and  the 
carriage  of  them  from  the  said  Fryars  to  our  Church  xxV* 
In  the  church  were  no  benches  or  chairs,  but  the  open  space 
of  the  nave  and  aisles  was  carpeted  with  straw  in  the  winter 
and  grass  in  summer. 

The  choir  was  by  rule  austere,  though  it  might  at  times  be 
made  gay  with  colour.  In  1506  Master  Henry  Rudde  of  Bury 
St.  Edmunds  left  20s.  to  the  Blackfriars  of  Cambridge 
"toward  the  peyntyng  of  ix  ordrys  of  aungelis  " ;  °  while  at 
Norwich  in  1550  there  still  remained,  fifteen  years  after  the 
priory  as  such  had  ceased  to  exist,  "  three  pecys  of  hangyngs 
of  black  worsted  imbrodred  with  dede  bodys  rysyng  out  of 
graves,"0 — no  doubt  a  decorative  set  of  hangings  for  the 
choir   at    Masses   of   Requiem.     The  windows    would    most 

1  Reliquary,  April,  1888,  p.  81. 

2  Antiquary,  vol.  xxiv,  p.  76.  3  Ibid.,  p.  266. 

*  Reliquary,  vol.  xxiii,  p.  216.  5  Wills,  P.C.C.,  12  Adeane. 

c  Reliquary,  New  Series,  vol.  iii,  p.  102. 


Ube  {priori  29 

ordinarily  have  been  coloured,  in  choir  and  church,  with  the 
arms  of  the  various  benefactors.  Norwich  church  retained  six 
windows  so  adorned  till  the  middle  of  the  eighteenth  century, 
while  one  other  was  "glazed  with  the  history  of  the  psalm 
Magnificat ."  x  Agnes  Maldon  (1506),  among  her  other  bene- 
factions in  Norwich,  wishes  "that  myn  executors  doo  to  be 
glased  with  my  goods  as  it  may  be  made  ij  newe  Cleristory 
wyndowes  in  the  Chauncell  of  the  said  freers,  for  the  soules 
before  rehersed  (all  cristen  soules)."2 

In  the  centre  of  the  choir  would  have  been  the  great 
breviaries  chained  to  their  iron  stands.  In  1365  Bishop  Ring- 
stead  of  Bangor,  a  Dominican,  left  his  "great  breviary"  to 
the  Friar  Preachers  of  Cambridge,  but  if  removed  and  not 
put  back  within  three  days  it  was  at  once  to  be  taken  to  the 
friars  of  Ludgate.3  In  the  Guildford  inventory  at  the  time  of 
the  suppression  we  find  mentioned  "a  feyre  egill  for  a 
lecturne,"4  and  Joan,  the  widow  of  Sir  Richard  Strangways, 
in  1500,  directed  her  body  to  be  buried  "in  the  qwer  of  the 
same  Friers  under  the  lettron  wherat  they  rede  theyr  legand. "  5 

Within  the  choir  no  tombs  at  first  were  allowed  to  be 
placed,  nor  indeed  any  sepulchral  effigies  at  all  in  any  Domini- 
can church.  But  this  ordinance  was  very  partially  obeyed. 
Maud  Lady  Maudly  (1438)  orders  a  memorial  stone  "with 
my  portraiture  thereon  in  copper  or  latten  gilt"  for  the  Black- 
friars  at  Scarborough,6  and  (in  1475)  John  Lord  Beauchamp 
at  Worcester  by  will  founds  a  new  chapel  on  the  north  side 
of  the  choir,  "and  to  make  a  tombe  for  me  with  my  effigy 
thereon  in  alabaster."7 

As  the  popularity  of  the  friars  grew  these  bequests  for 
burial  became  embarrassingly  the  cause  of  quarrels.  On 
21  January  1391,8  royal  letters  of  protection  were  issued  for 
the  Dominicans  at  Hereford  against  certain  malicious  people, 
so  that  no  corpse  is  to  be  disinterred  there  without  leave  of 
the  prior  and  convent.  Yet  in  the  March  of  1392  the  friars 
appear  to  have  lost  their  case,  for  a  new  royal  ordinance 
(presumably  relating  to  the  same  affair)  commands  the  body 
of  John  Hastings,  Earl  of  Pembroke,  to  be  dug  up  and  taken 
to  the  Franciscans  in  London  for  burial,  in  order  to  avoid 
disputes. 

Later,  indeed,  the  burials  mentioned  in  the  wills  are 
so  abundant  that  one  supposes  the  churches  to  have 
become  a  perfect  museum  of  graves.  In  1403,  after  the 
battle    of    Shrewsbury,    many    of  the    slaughtered    nobility 

1  Reliquary,  New  Series,  vol.  ii,  p.  211,  and  vol.  iii,  p.  45. 

2  Wills,  P.C.C.,  20  Adeane.  3  Reliquary,  April  1885,  p.  206. 
4  Ibid.,  Jan.  1887,  p.  18. 

6  Testamenta  Eboracensia  (Surtees  Society),  Part  II,  p.  528. 

6  Reliquary,  April  1880,  p.  203. 

7  Ibid.,  July  1879,  p.  28.  8  Ibid.,  July  1882,  p.  22. 


3o  Uhc  jEnglisb  Dominicans 

were  laid  to  rest  in  the  Dominican  church  there.1  In  1433 
John  Moseley  wants  to  be  buried  in  the  London  Blackfriars 
"before  the  Image  of  S.  Mary  commonly  called  le  Pyte"; 
William  Cotton  (1453)  prefers  the  "  Image  of  S.  Michael  "  ; 
John  Gall  (1465)  mentions  the  statue  of  "  S.  Peter  of  Meleyn  "  ; 
Patrick  Hedly  (1494),  an  Irish  merchant,  naturally  thinks  of 
the  national  patron,  and  asks  to  be  placed  "afore  the  image 
of  S.  Patryke  or  nigh  thereabout";  Richard  Billesden  (1493), 
perhaps  because  he  had  always  hated  draughts,  required  to 
be  "as  nigh  to  the  wall  as  may  be  "  ;  Richard  Bridesall  (1392) 
at  York  chooses  to  be  "next  my  mother";  John  Richmond 
(1452),  again  in  London,  touchingly  seeks  only  to  be  "near 
the  tomb  where  his  children  rest  "  ;  while  Joan  Ingoldesthorpe 
(1494),  without  overmuch  delicacy,  leaves  her  "  stinking  and 
corrupt  body  "  to  be  buried  in  the  Chapel  of  our  Lady  "  where 
the  body  of  Sir  John  Tiptoft,  late  Earl  of  Worcester,  her 
brother,  lies."2 

There  would  appear  to  have  been  a  regular  ceremony  for 
these  funerals,  for  one  will  (1484)  specifies  that  the  Friar 
Preachers  are  to  fetch  the  body,  and  another,  earlier  (1471), 
distinctly  asks  that  the  prior  and  convent  should  come  with 
their  cross,  "  as  the  usage  is,"  and  convey  his  body  to  their 
church,  and  for  this  and  the  placebo,  dirige,  and  Mass  they  are 
to  have  2od.;  while,  in  addition,  each  friar  priest  present  is  to 
have  Sd.,  and  every  other  friar  and  novice  <\d.  Sometimes 
poor  men  are  provided  with  black  gowns  and  hoods  and 
large  candles,  and  are  required  to  recite  psalms  or  rosaries. 
Again,  further  details  of  the  customary  procession  are  shown 
in  the  will  of  Oliver  Daniel  (proved  in  1507)  "  every  novice 
of  every  suche  place  devoutly  by  hymself  or  ells  twoo  and 
twoo  togiders  say  a  lowe  dirige  with  comendacions  and  our 
lady  psalter."3  Earlier,  too,  than  this  (in  1373),  when  Friar 
Thomas  Edwards  died  at  Modbury,  the  vicar  of  the  parish 
promptly  buried  him  in  the  churchyard  to  the  intense  indigna- 
tion of  the  prior  of  the  Blackfriars  at  Exeter,  to  which  house 
Edwards  technically  belonged.  The  bishop  was  appealed  to. 
He  considered  the  prior's  claim  to  be  just,  and  ordered  Vicar 
John  to  disgorge  the  body  and  deliver  it  to  the  friars  for 
re-burial  in  the  convent.4  Even  more  unpleasant  was  the  case 
of  Sir  Henry  Rawley,  who  died  at  Exeter  in  1301,  ordering  in 
his  will  that  his  body  was  to  be  buried  with  the  friars.  The 
dean  insisted  that  the  corpse  should  first  be  taken  to  the 
cathedral  before  actual  burial,  and  that  the  parochial  rights 
would  in  that  way  be  safeguarded.  The  friars  refused ;  but 
the  canons  seized  the  body  all  the  same  and  took  it  in  triumph 

1  Reliquaty,  vol.  xxvi,  p.  11. 

2  Antiquary,  1891,  p.  123,  etc. ;  Yorkshire  Archaeological  and  Topological 
Journal,  vol.  vi,  p.  15.  » 

3  Wills,  P.C.C.,  21  Adeane.  *  Reliquary,  July  1S86,  p.  256. 


Ube  priors  31 

to  the  cathedral,  bringing  it  back  later  to  the  convent  gate. 
The  friars  now  refused  to  have  anything  further  to  do  with  the 
affair,  locked  the  door  and  paid  no  attention  to  the  violent 
ringing  of  the  bell.  The  canons  retorted  by  leaving  the  body 
and  retiring.  But  this  after  a  while  produced  so  unpleasing 
a  result  that  in  the  interests  of  general  health  the  Chapter  had 
to  order  the  remains  to  be  interred  after  all  in  the  cathedral. 
This  rebuff,  however,  was  much  disliked  by  the  canons,  who 
organized  an  attack  on  the  priory  by  the  mob ;  but  before 
this  could  be  delivered  the  friars  got  wind  of  it,  and  in  a 
thoroughly  drastic  fashion  excommunicated  whoever  ventured 
on  so  irreligious  a  course.  Finally,  after  two  whole  years,  in 
1303,  peace  was  made,  and  the  bones  of  the  good  knight  were 
brought  back  to  rest  at  last  (as  he  had  wished)  among  his 
beloved  friars.1  Occasionally  it  is  requested  that  the  Mass  be 
said  by  a  particular  Dominican.  Thus  John  Forest,  priest,  in 
1500:  "I  will  have  a  priest,  Fryer  Arpyngham,  to  syng  for 
me  and  my  friendes  the  space  of  a  hole  yere,  within  the 
blakfreers  in  Norwich  and  he  for  to  have  for  his  labor  vij 
marke  Immediately  as  may  be  borne  as  my  goods  may  come 
yn."  '  Yet  for  all  this  sombre  ceremony  there  was  sometimes 
good  cheer.  Says  William  Rede  of  Boston  (1508),  merchant 
of  "  the  Staple  of  Caleis  ":  "I  will  at  my  buriall  that  preests 
after  dirige  and  freers  have  brede,  chese  and  drynke  and  the 
brethren  and  sistern  of  Corpus  Christi  guylde  and  Saynt 
petir's  guylde  have  spiced  brede,  comfytes  and  wyne."  3  Dame 
Eleanor  Houghton,  too,  left  very  full  instructions  in  her  will 
at  Worcester,  8  March  151 1:  she  bequeathed  40^.  to  the 
friars  for  her  burial  :  for  being  present  and  doing  observance 
at  the  dirge,  Mass,  and  burying  every  graduate  priest  should 
have  2od.,  every  other  beneficed  or  unbeneficed  priest  i2d., 
every  parish  clerk  2d.,  and  every  child  having  a  surplice  id. 
A  convenient  dole  was  to  be  dealt  among  the  poor  people,  and 
2d.  given  to  every  poor  man  and  woman  of  the  almshouses 
who  cannot  come  to  the  dole:  "  and  for  such  worshipful  and 
honest  persons  that'  come  to  the  burying,  meat  and  drink  shall 
be  provided  in  a  worshipful  manner."  Torches  and  wax  tapers 
were  to  be  provided  "  according  to  her  degree,"  and  of  those 
that  hold  them  at  the  burial  every  man  was  to  have  a  black 
gown  with  a  hood  and  2d.  in  money,  and  every  woman  a  white 
gown  with  a  hood  and  2d.4,  Hence  the  infinite  scorn  and 
reproach  in  that  phrase  of  Walsingham's  in  which  he,  after 
noting  how  bare  and  beggarly  was  the  funeral  of  deposed  and 
forsaken  King  Richard  II  at  the  Blackfriars  of  King's  Langley, 
mentions  indeed  the  presence  of  the  Bishop  of  Chester  {i.e., 
Coventry  and  Lichfield,  John  Bunhill)  and  the  abbots  of  St. 
Albans  and  Waltham,  but  adds  "  there  was  not  any  one  who 

1  Reliquary,  July  1886,  p.  254.  2  Wills,  P.C.C.,  4  Adeane. 

3  Ibid.,  13  Bennett.  4  Antiquary,  Dec.  1891,  p.  268. 


32  XTbe  Bnglisb  Dominicans 

would  invite  them  to  dinner  after  their  trouble."1    Evidently 
without  a  feed  a  funeral  was  hardly  complete. 

In  the  choir  the  office  would  be  sung-  day  and  night  to  the 
accompaniment  of  a  "  peyer  of  orgaynys.""  Matins  began  at 
midnight,  i.e.,  not  at  the  hour,  but  at  the  watch  of  midnight, 
at  any  time  between  12  and  3  a.m.,  for  the  length  of  the  hours 
varied  according  to  the  seasons.  Always  there  were  twelve 
hours  of  daylight  and  twelve  hours  of  darkness,  so  that  the 
hours  of  the  full  summer's  day  were  seventy-five  minutes  and 
those  of  the  summer's  night  were  forty-five  minutes.  In  winter 
the  computation  was  reversed,  the  daylight  hours  being  forty- 
five  minutes  and  the  night  seventy-five  minutes  long.  At  the 
equinox  by  consequence  both  by  day  and  night  sixty  minutes 
completed  each  hour.  Prime  was  said  at  the  first  light  of 
dawn  and  compline  ended  with  the  failing  of  the  evening  light. 
Thus  the  real  times  for  the  seven  hours  of  the  Divine  Office 
varied  considerably  at  the  various  seasons  of  the  year. 
Apparently  all  the  community  were  in  bed  at  6.30  or  7  at 
latest  and  rose  at  about  3  o'clock.  This  gave  them  some 
seven  or  eight  hours  of  sleep;  and  should  this  sleep  be 
shortened,  as  happened  in  the  summer  owing  to  the  earlier 
rising,  the  afternoon  siesta  kept  the  friars  in  good  health. 

At  night  the  church  was  ordinarily  locked,  but  all  day  long 
it  stood  open.  This  explains  why  in  1480  the  Prince  of  Wales 
enjoins  the  bailiffs  of  Shrewsbury  to  remedy  the  nuisance  from 
which  the  Dominicans  suffered.  "  Hogges  bring  in  the  said 
karen  into  their  Chirch  when  they  be  assembled  there  to 
goddes  plesure."3  (The  "they"  in  this  case  being  the  friars 
presumably,  not  the  hogs.)  Even  apart  from  hogs,  there  were 
sometimes  difficulties  in  church  from  the  want  of  sanitation, 
for  a  petition  from  the  Carmelites,  the  Dominicans,  and  the 
Bishop  of  Salisbury  (dated  1290)  reached  Parliament  protesting 
against  the  stench  that  arose  from  the  Fleet  river  in  the  City 
of  London,  a  stench  so  intolerable  that  it  was  impossible  to 
say  office  in  church  without  running  grave  risk  of  bodily  harm. 
Indeed,  many  of  the  Carmelites  had  already  died  from  the 
effects  of  it.4 

Leading  out  of  the  choir  to  the  east  of  the  conventual 
buildings  was  the  sacristy.  Here  were  stored  the  vestments 
and  altar  furniture,  ample  for  every  occasion,  even  to  "  lytyil 
copys  for  chyldern."0  Much  might  have  been  worn  and  faded, 
but  much  also  was  richly  embroidered.  Jane  Beauchamp 
bequeaths  to  the  Dominicans  of  Hereford  "a  hool  sute  of 
black  (that  ys  to  say  a  chesypul,  two  tunicles,  three  coops) 
with  my  best  pair  of  candlesticks  of  silver  wisthen :  and  my 
best  sute  of  vestments  of  cloarth  of  Gold  with  Peacocks."6 

1  Reliquary,  April  1879,  p.  213.  2  Ibid.,  Jan.  1887,  p.  18. 

3  Ibid.,  Oct.  1885,  p.  12.  *  Merry  England,  no.  72,  p.  37. 

6  Reliquary,  July  1879,  p.  29.  6  Ibid.,  July  1882,  p.  24. 


XTbe  flMiorg  33 

At  Gloucester,  in  the  inventory  of  27  July  1538,  is  noted  "  a 
sewt  of  blew  sylke  with  goldyn  bests. " ' 

The  east  wing-  appears  ordinarily  to  have  consisted  of  the 
store-rooms  and  cellars  and  kitchens:  over  these,  in  London,2 
were  the  apartments  of  the  prior  and  the  provincial,  while  on 
the  ground  floor  close  by  were  also  various  lecture  halls  for 
the  novices,  the  provincial's  hall,  and  the  chapter-house.  Due 
south  of  the  east  wing  was  the  fermory  or  infirmary.  This 
was  a  quarter  apart.  It  had  its  own  dormitory,  refectory,  etc. 
Close  at  hand  was  a  garden  or  some  open  meadow  or  at  least 
the  smooth  level  grass  of  its  quadrangle,  for  the  recreation  of 
the  sick.  In  a  thirteenth-century  commentaryon  the  Dominican 
constitutions,  the  ideal  infirmarian  is  described  as  affable  and 
discreet,  open-handed,  of  unalterable  patience.  He  should  be, 
it  declared,  as  tender  as  a  woman,  for  it  is  written  in  the  Book 
of  Ecclesiasticus:  "Where  no  woman  is,  the  sick  man  is  in 
want."  To  the  infirmary  came  the  friars  for  their  monthly 
blood-letting,  performed  by  the  local  physician,  who  was 
doctor,  dentist,  and  surgeon  in  one.  Here,  too,  concerts  were 
given  to  cheer  the  sick,  for  some  of  their  songs,  with  quaint 
mirthful  tunes,  are  still  extant.  Even  death,  as  far  as  might  be, 
lost  here  something  of  its  unloveliness.  Amid  the  chaunted 
cadences  of  the  Salve  Regina,  the  soul  gently  lifted  the  latch 
and  passed  to  the  outer  air  of  the  new  life.3  For  each  the 
friars  said  their  masses  of  suffrage,  and  kept  a  yearly  obit. 
Such  a  list  of  the  deceased  members  still  remains  in  the  case 
of  the  Guildford  Dominican  community:  and  some  anniver- 
saries are  noted  in  the  illuminated  Horae  Diurnae  of  the 
Norwich  Priory/ 

To  the  west  of  the  infirmary  and  forming  the  whole  south 
wing  of  the  quadrangle  was  the  refectory  or  frater.  Its  length 
and  general  size  may  be  estimated  by  this  fact,  that  it  occupied 
the  entire  south  side  of  the  priory.  Here  no  doubt  were  held 
some  of  the  great  assemblies,  ecclesiastical  or  lay,  that  at 
times  are  reported  to  have  taken  place  at  the  Blackfriars,  like 
the  Mad  Parliament  of  Oxford  in  1258.  London,  however,  had 
a  separate  building  altogether  to  the  south-west  of  the  priory, 
where  parliament  sat,  and  church  councils  held  their  meetings 
for  the  condemnation  of  error,  and  the  great  Court  of  Inquisi- 
tion under  Cardinals  Wolsey  and  Campeggio  sifted  evidence 
for  and  against  the  validity  of  Henry's  marriage  to  Katharine 
of  Aragon.  On  the  same  site  was  the  Blackfriars  Theatre, 
where  once  again  by  players  in  the  pageant  of  Henry  VIII, 
the  drama  of  the  divorce  was  enacted. 

In  the  refectory  the  seats  were  placed  against  the  walls  with 

1  Archaeological  Journal,  1882,  p.  8. 

2  Archaeologia,  vol.  lxiii,  p.  68. 

3  Humbertus,vol.  i,  p.  411,  vol.  ii,  pp.302,  319;  Analecta,  1897,  pp.  47-48. 

4  Reliquary,  Jan.  1887,  p.  11;  April  1889,  p.  98. 

D 


34  ftbe  Bnglisb  Dominicans 

the  tables  in  front,  so  that  the  friars  sat  facing  the  centre.  At 
the  farthest  end  from  the  kitchen,  which  communicated  with  the 
refectory  through  a  turn  or  hatch  (an  inventory  of  1538  speaks 
of  "  a  gret  bolting  hoche"1),  sat  the  prior,  on  his  left  the 
sub-prior.  Between  them  and  over  their  heads  hung-  a  crucifix 
or  some  sacred  picture  was  painted.  Thus  the  famous  Last 
Supper  of  Leonardo  da  Vinci  is  frescoed  on  the  walls  of  the 
Dominican  refectory  of  S.  Maria  delle  Grazie  at  Milan. 
Humorous  designs  sometimes  brightened  the  room.  At  Gratz, 
amongst  other  quaint  sculpture,  is  a  dog  with  a  piece  of  bread 
balanced  on  its  nose,  while  an  imperious  hand  uplifted  holds 
the  animal  in  suspense.  Under  it  is  written:  Licentia comite.1 
No  doubt  the  hungry  friars,  waiting  for  the  prior's  signal  to 
begin,  saw  the  analogy  and  patiently  expected  the  given 
command.  From  the  feast  of  High  Cross  (14  September)  till 
Easter — the  long  fasting  season— the  brethren  dined  at  two 
or  three  in  the  afternoon  ;  from  Easter  to  High  Cross  at  mid- 
day. For  the  novices  and  old  and  sick  there  was  an  earlier 
meal  at  six  or  seven  in  the  morning.  This  must  have  been  a 
pretty  solid  refection,  for  one  thirteenth-century  writer  bids 
them  not  to  take  too  much  lest  they  should  spoil  their  dinner, 
which  came  some  five  hours  later.  But  this  same  writer  has 
left  us  a  delightful  picture  of  hungry  friars  pacing  the  long 
cloister,  going  out  to  gaze  on  the  sundial  and  urging  the 
brother  sacristan  to  ring  the  bell  and  hasten  on  the  time  for 
meals.  Supper  consisted  apparently  of  a  drink  of  wine  or  beer. 
Perhaps  a  biscuit  or  cake  was  added.3 

After  the  bell  sounded  for  dinner  the  friars  went  and  washed 
their  hands  in  the  long  trough  of  water  outside  the  refectory. 
When  all  were  assembled  the  prior  said  the  De  Profundis 
Psalm  ;  sometimes  other  prayers  were  added.  Reference  is 
made  to  this  practice  in  the  will  of  Sir  Robert  Southwell, 
knight,  in  1514.  He  directed  his  "most  vile  body"  to  be 
buried  "in  the  cloister  of  the  Friars  Preachers  in  the  city  of 
London  under  or  near  the  Lavatory  there,  nigh  to  the  picture 
of  the  holy  Crucifix  there  set.  I  will  that  that  friar  of  the  same 
place,  appointed  daily  for  the  work  to  say  there  the  mass  of 
the  Trinity,  by  the  space  of  xx  years  next  after  my  decease 
say  every  day  a  special  collect  in  his  mass  for  my  soul,  also 
de  profundis  with  a  pater  and  ave  and  crede  for  my  said  soul 
...  at  the  said  lavatory  immediately  when  the  convent  of 
the  said  place  or  the  most  part  of  them  shall  go  to  dinner. 
Item  I  will  that  that  friar  being  a  priest  that  first  happen  to 
come  any  day  during  the  said  xx  years,  in  the  morning  first 
to  the  said  lavatory  to  wash  his  hands  and  then  and  there  to 

1  Reliquary,  Jan.  18S7,  p.   18. 

2  Mortier,  Histoire  des  Maitres  Generaux  de  Tordre  des  freres  Preclieurs, 
1904,  Paris,  vol.  i,  p.  612. 

3  Humbertus,  vol.  ii,  p.  539,  vol.  iii,  p.  193. 


Ube  jpriors  35 

say  de  profundis  for  the  souls  before  said,  have  for  his  so  doing 
\d."  Further,  he  left  13s.  \d.  yearly  to  the  prior  and  sub- 
prior  to  say  "  God  have  mercy  on  my  soul  "  every  day  after 
dinner.1 

Then  beginning"  with  the  youngest,  the  community  entered 
the  refectory.  Grace  was  sung,  the  friars  standing  in  two  long 
lines  up  the  whole  length  of  the  frater  (in  London  it  was 
114  feet  long),  then  sitting  in  their  places  while  some  verses 
of  scripture  were  chaunted.  Then  silence  followed,  broken 
only  by  the  noise  of  serving  and  by  the  reader's  voice  as  he 
chaunted  through  a  passage  from  the  Constitutions  (this  would 
have  been  omitted  if  strangers  were  present).  On  Mondays  the 
Rule  of  St.  Augustine  was  read ;  on  other  days  special  writ- 
ings of  the  Fathers,  called  Originalia  {i.e.,  homilies),  and  the 
Passions  of  the  Martyrs.  When  the  prior  gave  the  signal  to 
cease,  the  reader  marked  the  place  where  he  had  left  off  with 
lead  or  wax.2 

The  tables  were  not  covered  with  tablecloths,  but  each  friar 
had  his  separate  cloth,  which  stretched  up  under  his  chin  to 
form  a  napkin.  Also,  on  a  smaller  cloth  in  front,  each  placed 
his  salad,  his  jug  of  water,  wine,  or  beer,  his  candles,  and  his 
fruit  skins.  William  Stalworth,  merchant  tailor  of  London, 
left  by  bequest  to  the  Dominicans  there  "  every  Lent  for  ten 
years  a  barrel  of  white  herrings  and  to  the  young  friars  of  the 
same  house  for  the  same  time  a  frayte  of  fygges."3  Henry 
Fulflo  of  Ipswich  bequeathes  in  i486  "  to  the  Freyer  Prechors 
a  barell  of  Beer."4  In  1285  the  Mayor  of  Lynn  (John  of  St. 
Omer)  sends  1  is.  to  the  Blackfriars  there  for  wine  on  the  feast 
of  St.  Dominic.'  Each  would  have  had  a  knife  and  a  spoon, 
but  forks  were  only  introduced  into  England  in  1303,  and  were 
for  a  long  time  too  great  a  luxury  to  have  been  allowed  in  a 
priory.  The  drink  was  ordinarily  beer,  and  to  it  each  was 
advised  to  add  water.  There  is  a  pathetic  story  recounted  of 
how  there  appeared  after  death  to  one  of  his  old  companions 
a  friar  suffering  severely  in  purgatory,  because,  so  he  said,  he 
had  always  taken  his  wine  neat  "  that  he  might  sleep  the 
better."6 

By  their  rule  the  Dominicans  never  tasted  meat  unless  they 
were  sick,  and  then  only  in  the  infirmary.  They  had  ordinarily 
two  courses,  to  which  the  local  superior  could  add  a  third. 
At  times  some  benefactor  would  send  in  presents  of  choice 
delicacies.  Thus  at  the  General  Chapter  of  London,  1250, 
Henry  III  provided  food  for  the  first  day,  the  Queen  on  the 

1  Antiquary,  Aug".  1891,  p.  78. 

2  Analecta,  1896,  p.  636;  Acta  Cap.  Gen.,  L.  12,  104;  Humbertus,  vol.  ii, 
pp.  299,  300,  289. 

3  Wills,  P.C.C.,  22  Ayloffe.  *  Reliquary,  April  1887,  p.  74. 

5  Archaeological  Journal,  1884,  p.  2. 

6  Reichert,  Vitae  Fratrum  (1896),  p.  208. 


36  Zhc  Englisb  Dominicans 

second,  while  the  abbots  of  Westminster,  St.  Albans,  Walt- 
ham,  and  the  citizens  of  London  helped  on  other  days.1  They 
were  austere  in  their  diet :  yet  remembering; ,  says  one  writer, 
that  they  were  like  horsemen  with  but  one  horse  for  lifetime. 
Chaunted  grace  ended  the  meal.  Later,  recreation  followed 
for  the  whole  community,  but  in  the  early  days  of  the 
Order  permission  to  talk  could  be  given  only  to  individuals, 
and  for  a  definite  purpose  and  for  a  determined  and  stated 
time.* 

Notice  in  passing  the  qualities  required  of  the  brother  who 
presided  over  the  kitchen  :  "  He  should  be  a  good  cook,  clean 
and  patient."  3  The  kitchen  lay  usually  in  the  extreme  south- 
west corner  of  the  quadrangle,  so  that  it  was  adjacent  both  to 
the  refectory  and  the  guests'  rooms.  Quite,  early  in  the 
thirteenth  century  there  were  no  guest  apartments ;  but  in 
1422  we  hear  of  a  heretic  condemned  in  "  Le  Hostrye  of  the 
Blackfriars  of  Ludgate. "  4  Also  in  141 1  a  French  embassy  lived 
in  the  same  apartments,  the  King  on  22  August  paying  ^36 
board  and  lodging  for  them.  Again,  in  14 12  (23  November), 
payment  was  made  to  the  London  Dominicans  for  the  am- 
bassadors of  the  Duke  of  Brittany,  who  stayed  with  them,  as 
also  did  the  representatives  of  the  Dukes  of  Berry,  Orleans, 
and  Bourbon.  Even  Charles  V  was  placed  here  in  1522.  Again, 
it  must  surely  have  been  of  the  guest  house  that  Froissart  was 
speaking  when  he  describes  (22  May  1328)  the  fight  between 
the  English  archers  and  the  followers  of  Sir  John  Hainault  at 
the  time  when  the  king  and  queen  kept  their  court  in  the 
Blackfriars  of  York:  "The  Queen  gave  her  entertainment  in 
the  dormitory,  where  at  least  sixty  ladies  whom  she  had  invited 
to  entertain  Sir  John  de  Hainault  and  his  suite,  sat  down  at 
her  table."  5 

So,  too,  at  Shrewsbury  the  queen  of  Edward  IV  gave  birth 
in  the  Dominican  Priory  to  two  sons,  one  of  whom  was  the 
luckless  Richard  of  York,  murdered  by  "  Uncle  Glo'ster"  in 
the  Tower."  And  at  Oxford  what  is  supposed  to  be  the  guest 
house  remains;  indeed,  it  is  all  that  does  remain.  Here,  how- 
ever, there  is  matter  for  long  discussion,  since  it  was  at  the 
Blackfriars  that  the  Bishop  of  Lincoln  stayed  on  his  visits  to 
Oxford,  so  that  some  of  his  official  deeds  are  dated  from  his 
il  mansio  among  the  Preachers,"  and  it  is  quite  possible  that 
this  mansio  is  the  old  black  and  white  house  still  standing  at 
the  corner  of  Rose  Place  and  Grandpont  Street. 

1  Merry  England,  April  1889,  p.  440. 

2  Contrast  Constitutions  of  1228  (Analecta,   1896)  and   those   of  1241 
{Analecta,  1897). 

3  Humbertus,  vol.  ii,  pp.  317-319. 

4  Merry  England,  1889,  p.  276,  etc. 

5  Yorkshire  Archaeological  Journal,  18S1,  p.   10. 

6  Reliquary,  Oct.  1885,  p.  79. 


'•36 


[To  fee 


TTbe  prion?  37 

The  guest  house  had  a  guest  master,  a  priest,  who  was 
exhorted  to  be  of  gay  humour,  a  lovable  man,  yet  grave 
withal,  tactful  of  speech  and  unsparing  of  his  time.  To  each 
guest  he  was  to  offer  bread  and  wine,  but  should  they  stay  too 
long  he  had  the  unpleasant  task  of  hinting  and  hastening  their 
departure.1 

The  chapter-house  has  already  been  mentioned  as  part  of 
the  west  wing  in  the  London  Blackfriars,  and  the  Crede  de- 
scribes its  frescoed  walls  and  high  windows  like  a  great  church. 
It  became,  indeed,  subsequently  the  church  of  St.  Anne, 
which  had  some  sort  of  parochial  jurisdiction,  for  the  prior 
had  always  to  appoint  for  its  services  "a  sufficient  curate."2 
The  building  dated  back  to  1281,  when  Master  Richard  de 
Stratford,  a  novice  and  not  a  professed  brother,  brought  into 
court  his  own  testament  and  caused  it  to  be  proved,  in  which 
he  assigned  certain  tenements  to  be  sold,  and  the  proceeds  to 
be  devoted  to  the  erection  of  a  chapter-house.3  Ordinarily  it 
was  a  rather  lofty  hall,  with  seats  all  along  the  walls ;  at  the 
farthest  end  was  the  prior's  stall,  overhung  by  a  crucifix. 
Later,  as  soon  as  the  custom  for  benefactors  to  be  buried 
there  came  into  vogue,  an  altar  was  placed  at  the  end  and  a 
chair  accommodated  the  prior.  He  held  chapter  as  often  as  he 
liked,  but  not  every  day.  Chapter  meant  that  each  in  turn 
accused  himself  publicly  of  his  faults  against  the  rule,  not  of  his 
sins.  Complaints  were  made,  when  made  at  all,  before  all  thus 
assembled,  and  the  prior  publicly  gave  his  penances.  It  was 
an  eminently  wholesome  system :  public  avowal,  public  accu- 
sation, public  punishment.  Also  in  the  chapter-house  were 
held  all  meetings  to  consider  the  administration  of  the  convent, 
to  decide  on  reception  to  the  habit  and  the  profession  of  the 
brethren,  to  vote  for  the  election  of  superiors,  etc. 

Above  these  lower  rooms  ran  the  dormitories  or  dorters, 
long  rooms  arched  by  a  single  span.  From  end  to  end  of  them 
stretched  the  lines  of  beds.  Opposite  to  each  bed  was  an  alcove 
formed  by  partitions  that  jutted  out  from  the  wall  immediately 
facing.  These  partitions,  perfectly  preserved  in  the  old  Priory 
of  Gloucester,  are  about  a  man's  height,  project  about  five  feet 
from  the  wall,  and  are  about  four  feet  wide.  These  were  the 
cells  {cellulae)  of  the  brethren.  They  were  thus  exactly  oppo- 
site each  bed,  had  table,  chair,  and  a  locker  for  a  few  books, 
were  ornamented  with  a  crucifix,  a  picture  of  Our  Lady  and 
another  of  St.  Dominic.  Since  each  cell  was  thus  open  at  the 
top  and  front,  silence  was  necessarily  very  strictly  enjoined 
as  the  only  possible  way  of  securing  the  required  opportunity 
for  study.  The  novices  had  simply  a  long  room  fitted  with 
beds;  they  alone  had  no  cells.  There  was  a  bed-warden, 
whose  duty  it  was  to  attend  to  the  cleanliness  of  all  within 

1  Humbertus,  vol.  ii,  pp.  310-315.  2  Merry  England,  1889,  p.  358. 

3  Sharpe,  Wills,  etc.,  vol.  i,  p.  52. 


38  Ube  Bnglisb  Dominicans 

the  dormitory.1  In  process  of  time  this  common  dormitory, 
distributed  into  open  cells,  was  split  by  a  corridor  into  one 
long  dormitory  or  sleeping-  place,  still  open  and  common, 
fronted  now  by  real  cells,  closed  up  and  individual  for  the 
greater  convenience  of  private  prayer  and  study.  But  even  from 
the  beginning  there  had  always  been  a  few  private  cells 
(camerae),  the  privileged  abodes  of  the  professors  and  the 
more  advanced  and  promising  students.  In  these  lights  were 
allowed,  so  that  even  after  sunset  they  could  continue  their 
work,  and  they  were  decorated  with  some  show  of  comfort : 
"  hangeyd  with  steyneyed  clothe.""  Indeed,  as  observance 
relaxed  the  cells  of  the  brethren  appear  to  have  become  more 
and  more  fitted  up  with  furniture.  Bridget  Edwardes  (1526) 
leaves  to  Friar  John  Ducheman  of  Ipswich,  "her  ghostly 
father,  a  crucifix  of  timber  carved,  a  tyke  for  a  feather  bed,  a 
fire-pan,  a  trammell,  and  a  pair  of  tongs."3  Perhaps  more 
luxurious  still  was  the  bequest  of  Margaret  Cuttiler  (1511) 
"  to  Friar  Harry  of  the  Black  Fryars  in  Ipswich,  a  feather 
bed,  blanket,  bolsters  and  sheets,  with  the  candle-light  that 
he  now  uses  in  his  sicknesse.'"  These  beds  were  very  often 
gay  with  coloured  upholster)',  especially  among  those  members 
of  the  province  who  became  royal  confessors.  Thomas  Rus- 
hook  and  Henry  Wylie,  who  directed  the  somewhat  impulsive 
conscience  of  Richard  II,  affected  as  their  favourite  adornment 
worsted  blue,  and  even  when  Thomas  Rushook  became  Bishop 
of  Llandaff  he  still  retained  his  fancy  for  that  colour.  On  the 
other  hand,  John  of  Lenham  and  John  of  Warfield  under 
Edward  II  preferred  red  serges,  and  the  King  spent  14s.  on  the 
purchase  of  these  luxuries."  All  this  helps  us  to  understand 
why  at  the  suppression  of  the  Dominican  priories  the  king's 
prize  consisted  usually  of  little  else  than  vestments,  the  lead 
off  the  roof,  flock  beds,  and  chafing  dishes. 

On  the  upper  story,  too,  in  order  to  prevent  the  damp  which 
so  easily  destroyed  the  parchment  rolls  and  harmed  the  illu- 
minated books,  was  the  library,0  not  necessarily  a  large  room, 
for  books  were  scarce,  yet  always  the  centre  for  those  whose 
work  of  preaching  or  teaching  needed  a  large  supply  of  learned 
material.  Round  the  walls  were  placed  cupboards,  each  with 
divisions  neatly  labelled  under  some  special  heading;  all  were 
catalogued.  In  each  was  written  the  name  of  the  priory  and 
the  name  of  the  donor,  with  a  request  to  the  reader  to  pray  for 
the  giver's  good  estate.  On  the  table  lay  pumice-stone  to  erase 
mistakes  and  markings,  and  many  a  sarcastic  word  was  spoken 
in  the  Middle  Ages  against  those  who  scribbled  comments  in 

1  Humbertus,  vol.  ii,  pp.  190,  253;  Analecta,  1897,  p.  178;  Reichert, 
Flamina  Chron.,  p.  29;  Mamachi,  Annates  Ordinis  Praed.,  vol.  ii,  p.  267. 

2  Reliquary,  Oct.  1886,  p.  260.  3  Ibid.,  April  1887,  p.  75. 
*  Ibid.,  p.  75.                          5  Home  Counties  Magazine,  1910,  p.  100. 

c  Humbertus,  vol.  ii,  p.  264. 


Uhe  priors  39 

the  margin  of  the  books  they  read ;  lead  for  closing-  the  books 
and  keeping-  them  shut;  knives  for  sharpening  the  quills; 
candles  for  night  time,  etc.  In  the  centre  of  the  room  appear 
to  have  been  large  pulpits,  to  which  were  chained  the  books 
of  reference  and  the  perfect  exemplar  copies  of  the  Breviary 
and  Missal,  which  were  never  to  be  taken  away.  The  other 
volumes,  in  spite  of  Papal  prohibition,  were  often  lent  about. 
In  1274,  on  30  October,  John  of  Balsham  acknowledges  the 
receipt  of  books  which  had  once  belonged  to  Friar  Robert  of 
Dunwich,  a  Bible,  a  Book  of  the  Sentences,  a  dictionary,  and 
the  Summa  called  le  Breton.1  These  had  somehow  come  into 
the  king's  hands,  and  were  by  him  returned.  The  author 
of  the  Philobiblon  (cap.  VIII),  who  has  some  hard  things  to 
say  about  the  Dominicans,  specially  commends  their  gen- 
erosity: "  But  although  we  have  acquired  a  very  numerous 
store  of  ancient  as  well  as  modern  works  by  the  manifold 
intermediation  of  the  religious,  yet  we  must  laud  the  Preachers 
with  special  praise,  in  that  we  have  found  them  above  all  the 
religious  most  freely  communicative  of  their  stores  without 
jealousy,  and  proved  them  to  be  imbued  with  an  almost  Divine 
liberality,  not  greedy,  but  fitting  possessors  of  luminous 
wisdom." 

It  is  to  be  presumed  that  the  chief  books  possessed  by 
Dominican  libraries  would  have  been  such  as  could  have  been 
classed  under  the  heading  of  Scripture.  In  the  Ludgate  library, 
however,  besides  Biblical  commentaries,  were  the  works  of 
Master  Wycliffe  and  replies  to  the  same,  several  tragedies  of 
Seneca,  a  volume  or  two  of  Cassiodorus,  some  of  the  Chronicles 
of  Giraldus  Cambrensis,  and,  under  the  label  of».science,  an 
illustrated  manual  on  the  motion  of  the  heart,  and  a  complete 
treatise  on  the  life  and  behaviour  of  comets.2  The  Cambridge 
Dominicans  had  a  Bible  in  the  vulgar  tongue.3  At  Boston  the 
friars  had  the  history  of  Archbishop  Turpin,  with  the  detailed 
story  of  how  Charlemagne  freed  Spain  from  the  Saracens. 
Indeed,  Boston  could  boast  of  the  most  readable  library  of 
all,  since  it  further  contained  the  Chronicle  of  Popes  and 
Emperors,  the  Gestes  of  Troy,  the  History  of  the  Greeks,  the 
History  of  the  British,  besides  the  usual  commentaries  on 
Scripture  and  the  treatises  on  theology. '  St.  Richard  of  Chi- 
chester in  1253  divided  his  books  by  request  among  the 
Dominicans  of  Arundel,  Canterbury,  London,  and  Winchester.5 
Similarly  Cecily,  Duchess  of  York,  mother  "  unto  the  most 
cristen  prince  my  Lord  and  son  King  Edward  the  iiij,"  adds 
this  item  to  her  will:  "  Also  I  geve  to  my  doughter  Brigitte 
the    boke   of  Legenda  aurea  in  Velem,   a  boke  of  the  lif  of 

1   P.R.O.  Lib.  A.  Thes.  Recept.  Scae.,  fol.  230. 

-  Merry  England,  18S9,  p.  279.  3  Reliquary,  1885,  p.  142. 

4  Ibid.,  1 88 1,  p.  90. 

s  Nicholas,  Testamenta  Vetusta,  vol.  ii,  p.  161. 


4Q  Uhc  Englisb  Dominicans 

Saint  Kateryn  of  Sene,  a  boke  of  Saint  Matilde."   Bridget  was 
the  Dominican  nun  at  the  convent  of  Dartford.1 

The  habit  then  worn  differed  only  in  minor  points  from  that 
customary  to-day  in  the  Order  of  St.  Dominic.  Linen  was 
forbidden  then  as  now  to  be  worn  next  to  the  skin,  though  we 
do  have  record  of  certain  friars  who  were  dispensed  from  this 
on  account  of  the  delicacy  of  their  flesh.  The  inconvenience 
was  certainly  very  great  at  times.  We  hear  of  a  Friar  Thibaut 
who  was  made  so  irritable  by  the  wool  and  so  restive  that  as 
he  paced  the  cloister  trying  to  say  his  office  he  met  the 
subprior  who  had  been  the  cause  of  his  entering  into  the 
Order,  and,  chafing  at  the  prickly  friction  of  his  rough  under 
garments,  as  a  vigorous  protest,  struck  him  over  the  head 
with  his  breviary.  However,  he  soon  got  accustomed  to  the 
irritation  and  lived,  so  he  tells  us,  happily  ever  after.2  The 
habit  consisted  of  a  white  tunic,  girdled  with  a  leather  belt  (so 
Dante'  distinguishes  St.  Dominic  from  rope-girdled  St. 
Francis)  over  which  hung  a  hood  and  scapular  of  one  piece. 
Over  all  this,  when  out  of  doors  and  on  solemn  occasions, 
was  a  hood  and  cloak  (again  all  in  one)  of  black,  whence  in 
England  the  popular  name  for  the  Dominicans  was  Black- 
Friars.  The  symbolic  interpretation  of  so  perfectly  simple  a 
habit  was  soon  seized  upon  by  religious  writers,  but  the  origin 
of  the  habit  lay  in  the  prosaic  causes  of  St.  Dominic's  own 
life.  The  white  tunic  and  black  cloak  he  inherited  as  his  portion 
from  his  earlier  acceptance  of  the  rule  of  St.  Augustine  and 
his  place  among  the  Canons  of  Osma.  The  rochet,  which 
must  first  have  been  his,  was  discarded  for  the  scapular  in 
obedience  to  an  apparition  of  Our  Lady  to  Reginald  of 
Orleans,  a  charming  young  professor  who  was  one  of  St. 
Dominic's  first  disciples  after  the  foundation  of  the  Order. 
But  there  were  sometimes  personal  vagaries  which  destroyed 
the  perfect  symbolism  of  black  and  white.  Bishop  Alexander 
Bache  of  St.  Asaph  leaves  in  his  will  a  garment  "parti- 
coloured, red  and  blue,  woven  of  cloth  of  gold" — a  queer 
adornment  for  a  friar,  even  though  he  was  a  bishop.  Lady 
Margaret  Aldeburgh  leaves  to  the  Dominicans  of  York  (1391)  B 
"  a  sanguine  cloak  trimmed  with  minivre,"but  this  is  to  help 
pay  the  expenses  of  their  new  bell-tower ;  and  there  are 
frequent  references  to  bequests  of  wonderful  garments  to  be 
made  into  chasubles  and  copes.  Widow  Alice  Woodgate  of 
London  (1387),  bequeaths  "a  whitecloth  of  Blanket"  to  be 
made  into  habit-wear;0  and  to  provide  for  the  General  Chap- 
ter of  the  whole  Order  at  Holborn  in    1263  (at  which  it  is 

1  Archaeological  Journal,  1878,  p.  21. 

2  Vitae  Fratrum,  p.  103.  3  Paradise,  canto  138. 
1  Reliquary,  1882,  p.  22. 

'    Yorkshire  Archaeological  Journal.,  1881,  p.  15. 
"  Sharpe,   Wills,  etc.,  vol.  ii,  p.  270. 


Uhe  prion?  4* 

supposed  that  St.  Thomas  Aquinas  assisted)  Henry  III 
ordered  from  the  royal  wardrobe  accounts  700  habits;1  in 
1243  he  also  gave  a  pair  of  shoes  and  a  habit  to  each  of  the 
eighty  London  Dominicans.11  But  in  1459  George  Boys  left  to 
David  Keene,  Blackfriar  of  Ludgate,  "  my  red  Irissh  mantell 
to  have  and  occupie  by  hym  for  tenue  of  his  lyf."  This  gay 
attire,  which  lightened  thus  the  grey  walls  of  the  priory,  was 
not  to  finish  its  course  with  David  Keene's  own  life,  for  Boys 
thought  evidently  that  its  own  chance  of  permanence  was 
greater  than  that  of  any  of  its  wearers.  It  was  to  be  passed 
on  from  friar  to  friar,  and  each  was  to  pray  for  his  soul's 
repose.3 

From  the  leather  belt  hung  writing  tablets,  a  knife,  a  hand- 
kerchief, and  a  pocket,  rather  like  the  old-fashioned  way  ladies 
had  in  the  Victorian  era.  The  lay  brothers  had  strings  of  beads 
called  paternosters,  but  the  priests  do  not  seem  to  have  carried 
rosaries  till  the  fifteenth  century.  Hats  were  used  only  when 
travelling,  especially  when  riding.  The  tonsure  was  shaved 
every  three  weeks  in  winter  and  every  fortnight  in  the  summer. 
Beards  were  at  first  optional,  though  in  the  end  they  became 
quite  forbidden.  No  contracts  have  yet  been  found  in  England 
with  local  barbers,  but  one  yet  remains  in  Italy  stipulating 
that  the  Dominicans  of  Perugia  were  to  be  shaved  every  ten 
days  in  summer  time  and  every  fifteen  days  in  winter.  Pre- 
sumably the  tonsure  and  beard  were  done  together,  the  hair 
on  head  and  chin  being  allowed  to  grow  till  the  official  fort- 
nightly or  three  weekly  harvest.  In  the  house  cloth  slippers 
were  worn ;  out  of  doors  the  Friar  Preachers,  like  the  Cister- 
cians, says  a  chronicler,  used  laced  boots.1 

Lastly,  in  describing  a  mediaeval  priory,  the  prison  must 
be  noted,  where  were  kept  refractory  brethren,  a  necessity 
indeed,  as  the  friars  were  exempt  both  from  the  lay  and  clerical 
courts.  Sometimes  scandals  arose  over  the  harsh  treatment 
accorded  to  those  condemned  to  the  dungeons;  and  sometimes 
it  would  appear  that  those  who  had  lost  their  reason  were 
here  kept  in  durance.  A  hard  system  truly,  yet  imposed  by 
the  whole  trend  of  social  life. 

Within  these  lines  ran  the  simple  passing  of  their  lives. 
Even  and  uninterrupted,  except  for  the  periodic  preaching 
and  begging,  was  the  daily  course  of  Dominican  existence. 
Occasionally,  as  we  shall  see,  embassies  or  royal  business 
required  much  travelling,  but  this  would  have  affected  only 
a  comparatively  few  members  of  the  English  Province.  Occa- 
sionally, too,  there  would  be  the  transference  from  one  house 
of  studies  to  another,  either  within  these  islands  or  even 
beyond  the  seas,  for  the  common  use  of  Latin  as  a  learned 

1  Merry  Envland,  1889,  pp.  440,  437.  2  Ibid. 

3  Wills,  C.C.L.,  3146,  fid. 

4  Humbertus,  vol.  ii,  pp.  273,  330;  Acta  S.S.,  Maii  iv,  p.  391. 


42  Ube  Biujiisb  Dominicans 

tongue  allowed  of  frequent  interchanges  of  professors,  irre- 
spective of  nationality  or  language.  Then  there  would  be  the 
Provincial  Chapters,  which  meant  a  yearly  meeting  in  one 
priory  of  the  province  of  the  representatives  of  all  the  other 
priories.  Here  business  was  done,  legislation  passed,  faults 
corrected,  promotions  and  degrees  conferred  on  professors, 
and  the  officials  of  the  convents  carefully  checked  or  com- 
mended. Still,  even  so,  that  too  became  part  of  the  permanent 
life  of  the  friars,  and  it  could  make  but  little  excitement  in  the 
ordered  ways  of  the  cloister. 

The  great  and  unfailing  source  of  new  ideas  and  fresh 
notions  must  have  been  the  annual  Chapters  General,  when 
from  England  friars  went  abroad  to  meet  their  fellows  in  an 
international  congress.  It  took  place  now  in  one  country, 
now  in  another,  in  England  or  France  or  Spain  or  Italy  or 
the  Empire.  There  was  the  journey  to  be  braved,  the  adven- 
ture of  the  sea,  the  long  perils  by  water  and  land,  the  weeks 
to  be  expended  before  some  far-off  town  was  eventually 
reached  in  time  for  the  meetings,  and  the  long  tramp  back 
through  cities  which  were  quite  likely  to  be  lately  convulsed 
by  sudden  wars,  and  through  valleys  and  over  hills  where 
darkness  might  be  a  grave  danger  in  itself  or  a  cover  from 
greater  ills.  This  would  surely  have  kept  England  incessantly 
in  touch  with  wider  movements,  and  enabled  the  friars  to  find 
larger  ideals  than  their  own  narrow  lives  might  have  sug- 
gested. But  there  was  very  often  a  national  antagonism  which 
made  these  chapter  journeys  not  wholly  pleasurable:  in  1309 
at  the  chapter  we  find  Friar  Guy  of  Vande,  procurator  of 
the  convent  of  St.  John,  in  the  province  of  France,  removed 
from  his  office  and  his  convent  for  "  receiving  ill  the  definitor 
of  England  and  his  companion."  And  three  years  later  the 
hostility  blazed  out  afresh,  for  the  General  Chapter  of  Car- 
cassone  awarded  ten  days  of  bread  and  water  to  the  prior  of 
Bayeaux,  in  the  province  of  France,  because  he  "  treated  with 
irreverence  the  definitor  of  the  English  Province  who  was  on 
his  way  to  the  General  Chapter."1  So  fierce,  in  fine,  became 
these  disputes  between  the  English  and  French  friars  that  it 
ended  after  many  quarrels  and  misunderstandings  in  the 
English  friars  refusing  to  attend  chapter  at  all.  It  seemed 
hopeless  to  convince  the  foreigner,  and  so  it  was  best  to  leave 
him  to  himself;  sucrf appeared  to  become  for  eight  years  the 
policy  of  the  latter  province,  a  sturdy  and  rather  narrow 
John  Bullism  produced  by  the  Hundred  Years'  War  and  a 
series  of  French  Master-Generals. 

Still  at  times  the  chapter  came  to  England  and  assembled 
in  London  (first  in  Holborn  1250  and  1263,  and  then  in  Ludgate 
1314  and  1335)  or  in  Oxford  1280.    It  was  in  London  in  1263 

1  Reichart,  Act.  Gen.  Cap.,  loc.  cit. 


TCbc  priors  43 

that  St.  Edward's  feast  was  accepted  by  the  Dominican  Order 
into  its  calendar  out  of  compliment  to  the  king",  as  in  Germany 
in  1353  it  added  the  feast  of  St.  Adalbert,  the  patron  of  the 
Emperor  Charles  IV.  Yet  on  the  whole  the  results  of  the 
chapters  were  not  so  much  complimentary  as  corrective.  The 
English  Province  in  1250  was  discovered  by  the  others,  as  we 
have  stated,  to  have  been  over  much  interested  in  building 
and  too  careless  of  its  heaped  up  debts.  Remarks,  keen  and 
critical,  were  directed  against  such  of  the  brethren  as  arrived 
on  horseback,  and  the  friars  of  Newcastle-on-Tyne  were 
especially  rebuked  for  having  come  at  all,  as  they  had  no 
right  of  suffrage.  Even  their  singing  plain  chaunt  in  harmonies 
instead  of  in  unison  was  declared  to  be  distinctly  opposed  to 
the  spirit  of  the  Order,  and  their  clothing,  too,  not  always 
according  to  the  decrees  of  chapter  and  the  express  wording 
of  the  constitutions. 

Yet  these  international  assemblies  bridged  over  all  differ- 
ences of  national  temperament,  and  added  a  wider  tolerance 
and  culture  than  each  province  could  have  helped  to  secure. 
Despite  the  severance  of  the  seas,  England  was  very  much  in 
touch  with  continental  life,  since  Christendom  was  no  mere 
theory,  but  a  defined  and  absolute  fact.  Yet,  closely  linked 
up  with  Europe,  the  English  Domicians  held  fast  to  their 
own  national  character.  They  had  a  distinct  life,  a  distinct 
tradition,  a  distinct  effect  upon  the  Order  as  a  whole.  At 
times  in  conflictwith  the  rest  over  points  of  religious  discipline, 
protesting  against  actual  reforms  that  they  judged  to  be  at 
variance  with  the  spirit  of  St.  Dominic,  they  yet  lived  their 
days  in  much  the  same  circumstances  as,  all  the  world  over, 
did  the  other  members  of  the  Order.  Here  and  there  climate 
made  difference  to  the  plan  of  the  priory,  to  the  food  (still 
more  to  the  drink)  customary  among  the  Friar  Preachers, 
but  really  the  life  was  one  and  the  same,  indivisible,  unique. 

Founded  and  organized,  the  Province  set  out  on  its  great 
work  in  teaching,  preaching,  and  affecting  the  political  and 
social  life  of  the  nation. 


CHAPTER  III 
THE  STUDIES 

IN  describing  the  work  accomplished  in  England  by  the 
Dominicans,  it  is  obvious  that  their  intellectual  labours 
should  come  first,  for  study  was  the  principal  means 
laid  down  by  St.  Dominic  to  achieve  the  purpose  of  his 
Order.  By  deliberate  design  he  had  adopted  the  pro- 
fession of  preaching.  His  acquaintance  with  the  needs  of  the 
Church  in  Southern  France  had  shown  him  how  essential  it 
was  for  all  Catholics  to  be  well  instructed  in  their  faith. 
Heresy,  which  was  his  main  enemy,  grew  and  fattened  on  the 
ignorance  of  priest  and  lay  folk.  Hence  his  particular  form  of 
preaching  was  not  a  moral  revival  so  much  as  elaborate 
exposition  of  Catholic  doctrine.  St.  Francis  delighted  in  the 
burning  eloquence  that  inflamed  men's  hearts  with  the  love  of 
God;  but  St.  Dominic,  knowing  that  perfect  love  must  follow 
upon  perfect  knowledge,  strove  rather  to  teach  truth.  He 
began,  therefore,  himself  with  his  earliest  band  of  followers 
to  frequent  theological  lectures  at  Toulouse,  for  in  order  to 
preach  the  mysteries  of  faith  it  was  essential  first  to  be  well 
grounded  in  their  exact  understanding.  "  Study,"  wrote  the 
fifth  Master-General,  Humbert  de  Romans,  "  is  not  the  end 
of  the  Order,  but  is  exceedingly  necessary  to  secure  its  two- 
fold end,  namely,  preaching  and  the  salvation  of  souls,  for 
without  study  neither  can  be  achieved."1  Learning,  therefore, 
especially  in  the  sense  of  theological  learning,  became  for 
them  a  religious  occupation,  a  divine  service.  Alone  of 
religious  orders  (so  in  the  thirteenth  century  they  boasted), 
the  Friar  Preachers  looked  upon  intellectual  activity  as  the 
chief  means  of  monastic  perfection.  Therefore  was  it  that 
Paris,  Bologna,  Toulouse,  and  Oxford  became  the  first  centres 
of  their  fullest  display. 

But  while  thus  they  were  driven  by  the  force  of  their  work 
to  become  students,  a  crisis  in  the  Church's  life  compelled 
them  at  the  same  time  to  become  professors."  The  foundation 
of  the  University  of  Paris  that  followed  upon  the  twelfth 
century  renaissance  and  its  immediate  success  made  it  the 
great  centre  of  Western  intellectual  activity,  and  drew  to  it 
doctors  and  masters  from  all  over  Europe.  At  first  a  band  of 
individual  teachers,  later  a  corporation  or  guild  of  professors 
in  arts  and  theology,  under  the  patronage  of  Philip  Augustus, 
it  made  Paris  the  capital  of  Christian  learning.  Only  by  so 
doing  it  at  the  same  time  and  for  the  same  reason  drained 
Christendom  of  its  theological  lecturers.    Everyone  who  had 

1   Opera,  vol.  ii,  p.  41. 

-  For  this  chapter  compare  A.  G.  Little's  Educational  Organization  of 
the  Friars  in  England  (Transactions  of  R.H.S.,  1894,  pp.  49-70),  and 
Mortier,  vol.  i,  pp.  222-253. 

44 


ftbe  Stufcies  45 

ambitions  to  advance  in  the  studium  hastened  to  make  best 
use  of  what  was  best  provided.  The  cathedral  schools  soon 
languished  and  decayed,  not  for  want  of  pupils,  but  of  pro- 
fessors. The  popes  therefore  enacted  as  early  as  1179  that 
chairs  of  theology,  beneficed  and  to  be  held  for  a  definite  term 
of  years,  were  to  be  established  to  train  the  clerics  and  poor 
scholars  who  could  not  hope  ever  to  reach  Paris.  The  Council 
of  the  Lateran  in  1215  considerably  extended  this  policy  by 
including"  in  it  not  only  cathedral  churches,  but  many  others. 
In  each  archiepiscopal  city  a  theologian  had  to  be  provided 
for,  and  in  each  episcopal  cit)'  at  least  a  master  of  grammar. 
Four  years  later  Honorius  III  bitterly  complained  that  nothing 
had  been  done,  and  ordered  the  bishops  to  take  care  to  send 
fit  students  to  the  universities  in  order  that  when  their  studies 
were  completed  they  might  return  and  teach  in  their  own 
schools.  For  this  purpose  he  so  far  relaxed  the  canons  against 
the  absentee  beneficed  clergy  by  allowing  them  to  retain  their 
revenues  for  the  five  years  required  for  such  a  course  at  Paris, 
Bologna,  and  elsewhere.  Even  at  Bologna  there  were  few 
masters  of  theology  to  be  found  (the  University  was  given 
over  wholly  to  canon  and  civil  law),  though  the  magistrates 
worked  hard  to  secure  one.  But  all  these  means  appear  to 
have  failed,  at  least  for  a  time,  for  St.  Thomas,  in  a  well- 
known  passage,  declared  that  even  in  his  day  (he  died  1274), 
with  the  exception  of  the  religious  orders,  there  were  few 
professors  of  theology  to  be  found  outside  the  universities. 
Guillaume  de  St.  Amour  objected  that  religious  had  no  busi- 
ness to  compete  with  the  laity  for  the  professorial  chairs  ;  but 
the  answer  to  this  was  perfectly  obvious,  for  had  it  not  been 
for  the  religious  there  would  have  been  in  many  dioceses  and 
monasteries  no  theological  masters  at  all.  Even  Matthew 
Paris,  who  was  always  too  devoted  to  concrete  historical 
matters  to  have  much  sympathy  with  scholasticism  in  its 
"attempt  to  penetrate  the  secret  counsels  of  God"  (Mag. 
Chron.  ami.,  1243)  bears  witness  to  the  theological  courses 
given  by  the  friars  within  the  greater  English  abbeys.  The 
Dominicans,  therefore,  were  driven  to  fill  the  vacancies  which 
had  so  dismayed  Pope  and  Council.  Each  priory  had  at  least 
one  professor,  whose  business  it  was  to  give  public  lectures; 
and  these  the  whole  community,  even  the  prior  when  not 
otherwise  occupied,  was  commanded  to  attend;  for  the  whole 
Order  was  organized  on  an  intellectual  basis,  and  designed 
to  make  every  convent  a  citadel  of  the  faith  and  every  friar  a 
crusader  for  truth.  But  not  only  did  the  Dominicans  in  this 
way  become  themselves  almost  as  much  a  Guild  of  Masters  as 
the  universities  had  become,  battling  indeed  with  the  uni- 
versities on  almost  equal  terms,  but  many  of  the  professors 

1  Cf.  Mortier,  vol.  i,  p.  224  note. 


46  Ufoe  jBtiQlisfo  Dominicans 

themselves  in  the  first  enthusiasm  of  the  friar  movement 
became  Dominicans.  Two  of  the  chairs  of  Paris,  one  of  the 
chairs  of  Oxford  became  in  this  way  permanently  occupied  by 
the  Preachers.  Moreover,  it  was  discovered  that  by  this 
Christian  learning-  stood  largely  to  gain,  for  as  friars  they 
could  be  quickly  transferred  from  centre  to  centre,  from  uni- 
versity to  university,  from  school  to  school.  Taking  no  vow 
of  stability,  as  did  the  monks,  nor  any  residential  fellowship, 
as  did  the  secular  doctors,  but,  in  the  sneering  phrase  of 
Matthew  Paris  (to  him  a  sneer,  to  them  a  boast),  having  "  the 
world  for  their  house  and  the  ocean  for  their  cloister,"  they 
were  moved  to  whatever  priory  had  most  need  of  them.  John 
of  S.  Giles  was  recalled  from  Paris  to  Oxford;  Jordan  of 
Saxony  lectured  indifferently  in  Bologna,  Paris,  and  Oxford ; 
Albert  the  Great  and  Thomas  Aquinas  were  regents  in  Paris, 
Bologna,  Naples,  Cologne,  or  might  follow  the  Papal  Court 
across  Europe,  yet  be  uninterrupted  in  their  professorial 
work.  Through  the  action  of  the  friars,  therefore,  the  fear 
felt  by  the  bishops- that  the  growing  greatness  of  Paris  would 
drain  dry  the  schools  of  Christendom,  and  by  its  very  exaltation 
of  learning  destroy  learning  altogether  as  a  common  heritage, 
was  for  ever  averted. 

But  this  very  attempt  to  deal  with  the  difficulties  of  theo- 
logical lecturing  so  as  to  provide  for  every  learned  as- 
sembly, threw  the  Dominicans  even  more  vigorously  than 
ever  into  their  intellectual  crusade.  A  crusade,  indeed,  it  was, 
for  jousts  and  tourneys  were  the  mediaeval  method  in  things 
of  argument  as  well  as  of  material  force  for  solving  the  pro- 
blem of  the  better  man.  Speakers  were  really  what  that 
method  trained,  rather  than  writers,  though  there  is  certainly 
no  lack  of  manuscript  to  prove  their  power  with  the  pen. 
Theirs  was  the  quick  wit,  the  give  and  take  of  attack  and 
counter-attack,  the  parrying  stroke  of  the  distinguo,  and  the 
rapier  swift  discovery  of  some  weak  joint  by  the  rapid  lunge 
of  the  atqui.  Logic  Lane  in  Oxford,  where  tradition  places 
many  such  an  encounter,  was  not  unique,  but  typical.  Now 
here  then  was  the  best  school  and  practising  ground  for  the 
public  preacher  who  was  to  stand  in  market  place  and  on 
hill-side  and  to  harangue  without  the  sheltering  defence  of  a 
pulpit.  He  must  be  quick  to  answer  as  well  as  clear  in  his 
exposition.  Wit  must  be  his,  and  homely  fable,  and  an  instinc- 
tive reading  of  the  feelings  of  a  crowd. 

So  once  again  the  universities  became  the  home  and  centre 
of  training  for  all  the  friars,  for  the  learned  theologian  whose 
work  was  a  clear  demonstration  of  the  mysteries  of  the  faith, 
for  the  professor  whose  auditors  included  many  beyond  the 
limits  of  his  Order,  for  the  popular  preacher  who  strolled  over 
Europe,  and  even  penetrated  eastwards  to  Armenia  and  west- 
wards to  Greenland,  who  linked  by  the  huge  stretch  of  his 


XTbe  StuNes  47 

mantle  Asia,  Africa,  and  the  Far  West  to  the  Holy  City  upon 
the  Seven  Hills. 

Care,  therefore,  was  taken  that  this  side  of  the  Order's 
work  should  be  fostered.  Students  and  lecturers  alike  were 
allowed  exemptions  from  the  liturgical  hours  which  for  the 
rest  were  a  distinct  and  severe  obligation.  Even  beyond  that, 
the  Dominican  constitutions  (a.d.  1228),  under  the  direct 
inspiration  of  St.  Dominic,  ordained  that  the  Divine  Office 
was  to  be  said  "  briskly  and  shortly,  so  that  their  devotion 
might  not  be  wearisome  to  them  nor  their  studies  hindered." 
Compline  alone,  with  its  sweet-sounding  Salve  Regina  Miseri- 
cordiae,  was  to  be  attended  as  an  obligation  by  all.  Priorships 
and  every  other  such  office  that  took  the  interests  of  these 
professors  away  from  studies  and  books  to  other  things  were 
forbidden  them.  The  writing  out  of  treatises  and  the  copying 
of  manuscripts  for  gain,  both  the  work  of  the  monastic  orders, 
almost  their  sole  form  of  intellectual  pursuit,  were  considered 
wholly  incompatible  with  the  deeper  learning  which  a  Friar 
Preacher  required.  Personal  privileges  were  given  from  Rome, 
rather  excessively  as  the  English  Province  judged,  which 
privileges  gave  the  students  some  small  relaxation  of  a  yearly 
holiday  with  friends  or  the  right  of  disposing  of  property 
within  the  Order,  or  of  wearing  linen  next  the  skin.  The 
registers  of  the  Master-General  during  the  fourteenth  and 
fifteenth  centuries  are  little  else  than  lists  of  such  exemptions, 
designed  to  keep  within  the  Order  everyone  who  could  help 
on  the  great  work  of  intellect.  But  the  most  dearly  prized  of 
all  was  the  privacy  of  a  separate  cell,  to  a  student  indeed  a 
welcome  condition  for  sustained  and  concentrated  work. 
Frequent  reference  is  made  to  these  studia  being  built  by  royal 
munificence,  as  when  Henry  III  gave  oaks  to  the  friars  of 
Oxford,  Northampton,  and  London1  for  that  purpose,  and  fur- 
ther, 12  February  1260,  he  allowed  to  the  latter  friars  besides 
their  timber  "two  thousand  of  free-stone  to  complete  their 
studies." 

John  of  Maren,  the  master  of  students  at  Lincoln,  was 
allowed  in  13902  to  have  the  cell  built  there  by  Friar  Ralph 
of  Ludd,  and  he  could  not  be  moved  from  it  except  for  some 
grave  reason.  Henry  Hemdoynwindes  two  years  later  was 
allowed  to  have  a  cell  where  he  could  eat  whenever  he  was 
ill,  and  to  which  he  could  invite  any  members  of  the  Order 
who  were  guests  at  the  Newcastle  priory.  But  these  were 
only  the  privileges  of  those  who  were  actually  professing  or 
studying  at  the  time,  and  were  not  personal  to  the  individual 
as  such. 

The  expenses  of  these  study  houses  and  of  the  whole  student 
system  was  naturally  a  very  severe  drain  on  the  resources  of 

1   Reliquary,  1883,  p.  146;   1880,  p.  26;  Merry  England,  1889,  p.  4  7 -5 
-  British  Museum  Add.  MSS.  6716. 


48  XTbe  Encjlisb  Dominicans 

the  particular  priory.  England,  indeed,  at  first  held  out  against 
the  establishment  of  such  a  centre  at  Oxford,  no  doubt  being 
particularly  conscious  of  the  debts  which  actually  burdened 
the  Paris  convent,  so  that  the  Master-General  was  forced  to 
remove  the  provincial  from  office  in  order  to  secure  its  estab- 
lishment. But  by  that  time  (1261)  a  system  was  gradually 
being  worked  out  whereby  the  priory  was  relieved  of  much 
of  its  financial  strain.  For  one  thing  a  regular  pension  was 
finally  settled  which  was  considered  adequate.  This  was  raised 
by  a  tax  on  every  house  in  the  Province,  graduated  according 
to  the  supposed  condition  of  each.  A  professor  in  France  or  in 
England,  whether  a  master  or  a  bachelor,  was  considered  to 
require  twenty  florins,  while  the  students  could  rub  along  on  fif- 
teen. At  King's  Langley,  Edward  II  found  it  necessary  to  pay 
for  each  friar  in  alms  five  marks  a  year,1  which  works  out  at 
about^3  jos.  annually;  this  is  strange,  forhe  always  considered 
in  his  gifts  to  other  houses  that  a  friar  lived  on  fourpence  a 
day.  But  no  doubt  he  judged  that  he  had  already  been 
generous  enough  to  his  foundation  there.  Edward  III  in- 
creased the  rate  of  payment  to  1005.  for  maintenance,  with  an 
additional  20s.  for  clothing.  The  statutes  of  the  Order,  how- 
ever, made  no  such  liberal  allowance.  The  house  of  studies 
had  indeed  to  provide  books  for  all  its  community,  but  the 
Province  was  answerable  for  clothes,  at  least  to  the  extent  of 
two  florins  a  year,  and  for  books  deemed  needful  up  to  four 
florins  a  year.  In  Paris,  where  demand  outran  supply,  the 
foreign  friars  had  to  bring  their  own  school  books,  and  were 
not  to  expect  after  they  had  arrived  to  be  able  to  buy  any. 
The  method  of  obtaining  books  was  left  to  the  genius  of  the 
student,  who  at  times  was  punished  for  having  satisfied  his 
need  in  an  unbecoming  way.  In  the  acts  of  the  Chapter- 
General  of  Bologna  (1240)  we  read:  "  Friar  Bartholomew  is 
to  be  deprived  of  his  Bible  on  account  of  the  infamous  way  he 
got  possessed  of  it,  and  he  is  to  prepare  himself  for  the 
discipline  and  to  submit  to  the  penance  imposed  by  the  vicar." 
Friends  and  patrons  contributed  to  these  students.  In  1289 
Bishop  Swinfield  of  Hereford  makes  a  present  of  20s.  to 
Robert  Bromyard,  later  the  famous  Dominican  theologian, 
towards  the  various  expenses  of  his  graduating  at  Oxford." 
Edward  II,  through  his  Florentine  bankers,  the  Bardi,  gives 
jQ6  for  Friar  Arnold  of  Stradley  to  study  in  Paris  in  1323; 
and  wills  like  the  two  following  abound  in  the  fifteenth  and 
sixteenth  centuries.3  In  1489  Alice  Paddington,  widow  of 
Thomas  Paddington,  a  London  fishmonger,  desires  to  be 
buried  with  the  Ludgate  Blackfriars  and  "oon  well-disposed 

1  Reliquary,  1878,  pp.  38,  80. 

2  Roll  of  Household  Expenses  of  Rich,  of  Swinfield,  Bishop  of  Hereford 
(Camden  Society),  vol.  i,  p.  145. 

3  P.R.O.  Rot.  Exit.  Scac.  Pasch.,  16  Ed.  II,  m.  10. 


C_  t  &mmtntc  U  vW  lout  ywpitl*  S&  pvi* 
rvtacu^  Src-  *u*tu«  pits  ^5*«  mlttaufv 

DOMINICAN   LECTURING   IN  UNIVERSITY 

Bv  permission  of  Curators  of  British  Museum  (MS.  Royal,  ly.  E.  Ill) 


[To  face  p.  4^ 


XTbe  Stu&tes  49 

frere  of  the  said  Freyers  prechours  of  London  exercising-  his 
lernyng  in  Oxford  and  in  Cambrigge  in  divinitie  to  sing  (Mass) 
for  my  sowle  and  the  sowles  of  my  two  late  husbondes  .   .   . 
in  the  Universities  of  Oxford  or  Cambrigge  by  the  space  of 
vj  yeres  next  after  my   decesse."1    In  1510  Richard  Crisp  of 
Northampton,   "  v  yeres  after  my  decesse  "  bequeaths  to  the 
four  orders    of  friars  there    "to   them  that   be  students  in 
divinitie  in  Oxford  ij  and  in  Cambridge  other  ij,  every  yere  to 
have  xxs.  apece  till  the  some  of  xxlis.  be  spent,  to  pray  for 
my   sowle."2    In    151 1    an    English    friar  studying  in   Paris 
obtained  leave  from  the  Master-General  to  come  home  "  to 
raise  the  necessary  funds  "  and    then   to  return  to  his  uni- 
versity.'  No  doubt  the  English  Province  had  somehow  failed 
to  provide  for  him ;  or  perhaps  his  benefactor  had  died  or  was 
unable  to  continue  the  necessary  support.  Gradually,  however, 
these  precarious  aids  were  consolidated  and  organized  on  a 
firmer  and  more  permanent  basis.    Burses  or  studentiae  were 
established  attached  to  particular  convents,  and  endowments 
out  of  province  funds  and  supported  by  an  annual  taxation 
of  every  priory  made  them  part  of  the  educational   organi- 
zation of  the  English  Dominicans,  for  it  must  be  remembered 
that  France  and  England  were  considered  the  most  intellectual 
centres  of  western  thought.    Paris  and  Oxford  had  no  equals 
in  all  Christendom,  and  were  legislated  for  in  all  the  General 
Chapters  of  the  Order  as  apart  from,  and  above  every  other 
university.    Hence  the  English  and  French  friars  boasted  of 
opportunities  for  study  such  as  none  others  could  rival,  and 
in  depth  of  style  and  brilliancy  of  thought  contributed  over- 
whelmingly to  the  learned  glories  of  the  Order.    Individuals 
like  Aquinas,  the  Italian,  and  Albert,  the  German,  towered 
above  the  rest;  but  in  bulk  and  numbers  the  French  and 
English  friars  were  easily  the  leaders  of  Dominican  thought ; 
such  were  Peter  of  Tarantaise,  Palude,  Kilwardby,  Maccles- 
field, Hotham,  Holcot.    For  it  is  not  to  be  supposed  that  in 
an  Order  like  that  of  the  Preaching  Friars  the  studies  were 
left  to  the  whim  or  fancy  of  any  particular  provincial  or  prior. 
The  whole  of  Europe  was  theirs  to  draw  from,  and  they  made 
splendid  use  of  their  golden  opportunities.    The  main  lines  of 
the  educational  organization  of  the  Order  depended  upon  cer- 
tain principles,  which  may  be  thus  tabulated: 

(a)  Each  priory  can  have  students. 

(b)  Each  priory  must  have  a  professor. 

Hence  we  have  to  begin  by  conceiving  each  convent  of  the 
English  Dominicans  as  a  place  of  studies  where  lectures  were 
being  given.  Priests  and  preachers  who  had  spent  many  years 
in  apostolic  labours,   or  who,  it  may  be,   had   directed  the 

1  Antiquary,  vol.  xxiv,  p.  173.  ~  Wills,  P.C.C.,  35  Bennett. 

3  Add.  MSS.,  6716. 

E 


so  TTbe  Engltsb  Dominicans 

consciences  of  kings  or  taken  no  mean  place  in  foreign  dip- 
lomacy were  exempted  from  these  lectures  only  at  the  personal 
discretion  of  the  Master-General.  Further,  students  were 
often,  indeed,  generally  to  be  found  in  each  house,  and  had  to 
be  instructed  in  what  was  then  considered  necessary  for  a 
Dominican  education.  But  besides  these  studies  established 
in  every  convent,  there  were  special  places  set  apart  for 
separate  courses  of  instruction,  and  from  these  students  would 
gradually  get  transferred  till  they  had  finally  received  the  full 
curriculum  laid  down  by  the  ratio  Studiomm  of  the  Order. 
Then  above  these  linked  groups  of  houses  were  the  twin 
Universities  of  Oxford  and  Cambridge,  where  these  lower 
classes  of  studies  were  indeed  pursued,  but  besides  were  to 
be  found  the  highest  available  learning  that  Christendom 
could  boast.  The  more  brilliant  students  and  the  more  suc- 
cessful professors  were  gathered  here  from  all  England,  and 
were  then  sent  outback  into  their  priories  to  preach  or  admin- 
ister or  lecture  themselves  again,  or  might  stay  on  for  more 
years  engaged  in  literary  or  professorial  pursuits. 

TheGeneralChapterof  London  in  1314  laid  it  downthatwher- 
ever  fourteen  students  could  be  found,  theology  and  philosophy 
or  some  tractate  of  "  Friar  Thomas  "  were  of  obligation,  the 
theology  occupying  the  whole  year,  and  the  philosophy  being 
read  concomitantly  from  Easter  till  the  beginning  of  August. 
TheChapterheld,  once  more  in  London,  in  i335furtherprovided 
that  in  every  province  schools  of  theology  and  philosophy, 
which  latter  was  to  include  also  the  arts,  were  at  once  to  be 
established.  This  really  had  by  that  date  actually  become  the 
practice,  so  that  this  decree  is  rather  to  be  looked  upon  as 
regularizing  an  existing  institution  than  as  the  beginning  of  a 
new  procedure. 

Naturally  the  first  stage  in  the  arrangement  of  the  studies 
was  the  establishment  of  grammar  schools.  At  first  it  is  to  be 
supposed  that  the  friars  were  drawn  from  the  ranks  of  uni- 
versity scholars  or  lecturers,  and  were  therefore  in  no  need  of 
acquiring  the  rudiments  of  grammar;  but  it  is  clear  that  very 
soon  boys  were  accepted  before  they  had  really  completed 
even  this  elementary  knowledge.  There  are  frequent  references 
to  these  boy-novices,  and  even  of  preachers  who  went  into 
the  grammar  schools  to  give  conferences  and  hear  confessions, 
and  so  attract  to  them  many  hardly  more  than  mere  children. 
Later  this  was  looked  on  as  the  scandal  of  the  Order  in  almost 
every  province.  The  author  of  the  Philobiblon  thus  rebukes 
the  English  friars  :  ' '  With  summer  fruit,  as  the  people  gossip, 
ye  attract  boys  to  religion,  whom  when  they  have  taken  the 
vows  ye  do  not  instruct  by  fear  and  force  as  their  age  requires, 
but  allow  them  to  devote  themselves  to  begging  expeditions, 
and  suffer  them  to  spend  the  time  in  which  they  might  be 
learning,  in  procuring  the  favour  of  friends  to  the  annoyance 


XTbe  Studies  51 

of  their  parents,  the  danger  of  the  boys,  and  the  detriment  of 
the  Order.  And  thus  no  doubt  it  happens  that  those  who  were 
not  compelled  to  learn  as  unwilling-  boys,  when  they  grow  up 
presume  to  teach  though  utterly  unworthy  and  unlearned, 
and  a  very  small  error  in  the  beginning  becomes  a  very  great 
one  in  the  end.  For  there  grows  up  among  your  promiscuous 
flock  of  lay  brethren  a  pestilent  multitude  of  creatures,  who 
nevertheless,  the  more  shamelessly  force  themselves  into  the 
office  of  preaching  the  less  they  understand  what  they  are 
saying  to  the  contempt  of  the  Divine  Word  and  the  injury 
of  souls  .  .  .  )-e  enter  on  the  labours  of  others,  ye  repeat  the 
lessons  of  others,  ye  mouth  with  theatric  effect  the  super- 
ficially repeated  wisdom  of  others.  .  .  .  Make  your  young 
men,  who,  though  ignorant,  are  apt  of  intellect,  apply  them- 
selves to  study,  furnishing  them  with  necessaries,  that  ye  may 
teach  them  not  only  goodness  but  discipline  and  science,  may 
terrify  them  by  blows,  charm  them  by  blandishments,  mollify 
them  by  gifts,  and  urge  them  on  by  painful  rigour  so  that  they 
may  become  at  once  Socratics  in  morals  and  Peripatetics  in 
learning  "  (chap,  vi,  p.  42-45). 

But  this  scathing  attack  on  fourteenth  century  Dominican 
youth  shows  how  the  laws  of  the  Order  had  become  dis- 
regarded. Yet  we  do  find  references  to  the  establishment  of 
grammar  schools  in  the  province,  such  as  in  London,  where 
among  the  "  obits  and  chauntereys  kepte  within  the  Blacke 
fryers  within  the  Citie  of  London  by  perpetuall  fundacion  " 
occurs  "  item  for  ij  prests  daily  syngynge  the  fyrst  mas  and 
the  last  masse  within  the  seid  fryers,  and  a  scole  master  of 
grammar  paid  by  the  goldsmythys — xiij/z  vj.y  vinW."1  The 
obits,  too,  of  the  Guildford  Priory,  which,  like  the  London 
list,  gives  no  date  for  each  particular,  mention  Friar  Galfrid, 
who  once  had  been  "  Master  of  Schools  at  Guildford,"  and 
Richard  Francis  (1440),  the  Dominican  Anchorite  of  Lynn, 
wrote  several  books  on  grammar  for  the  use  of  boys,  imply- 
ing the  existence  of  such  a  grammar  school  at  his  convent. 
Quite  at  the  end,  too,  of  the  mediaeval  period  (1520),  "  Friar 
Clement  Guadel  of  the  convent  of  Yarm,  is  assigned  to  the 
aforesaid  convent  of  Yarm,  and  the  prior  is  ordered  not  to 
occupy  him  in  any  convent  and  office,  but  to  allow  him, 
when  divine  office  is  over,  to  go  to  the  Grammar  Schools."2 
But  how  far  these  can  be  taken  as  proofs  of  any  general 
teaching  of  grammar  it  is  impossible  to  say.  Certain  it  is 
that  all  novices  who  failed  to  satisfy  the  examiners  in  morals 
and  knowledge  were  ordered  to  be  rejected  immediately ; 
though  the  author  of  the  Philobiblon  makes  us  realize  that 
such  an  injunction  was  not  by  any  means  always  enforced. 

1  Merry  England,  1880,  p.  272;  Reliquary,  1887,  p.   14;  Archaeological 
Journal,  1884,  p.  14^. 
-  Add.  MSS.,  6716. 


52  Zbc  Ettdltsb  Dominicans 

Next  above  the  schools  of  grammar  were  the  schools  of 
arts.  In  the  earliest  constitutions  of  1228,  the  study  of  arts 
was  decidedly  discouraged,  for  no  one  was  at  all  allowed  to 
work  at  "the  books  of  the  gentiles  and  the  philosophers"; 
and  even  to  consult  them  and  occasionally  inspect  their  argu- 
ments was  considered  to  be  likely  to  cause  danger.  Secular 
science  and  the  liberal  arts  could  indeed  by  special  dispensa- 
tion of  the  Master-General  or  General  Chapter  be  taken  up ; 
but  even  this  was  permitted  only  after  two  whole  years  had 
been  spent  in  the  Order,  for  the  newly  professed  had  first  to 
acquaint  themselves  with  the  liturgy,  with  the  customs  of  the 
Order,  and  some  sort  of  science,  but  not  the  arts.  But  this 
attitude  of  suspicion  and  jealousy  soon  gave  way  to  a  com- 
plete acceptance.  The  fifth  Master-General  notices  the  change 
of  attitude :  "  First  no  one  was  allowed,  then  it  was  permitted, 
but  with  discretion  and  rarely ;  but  now  finally  the  reins  are 
altogether  loosened  "  (Opera,  I,  435).  Certainly  in  1259  each 
province  was  actually  commanded  to  open  such  "a  school  of 
arts  where  the  young  might  be  taught,"  and  in  1261  this  was 
finally  confirmed :  "  Let  the  younger  friars  and  those  who  are 
apt  in  learning  be  instructed  in  logic."  There  are  traces  of  such 
schools  in  England,  though  the  references  are  of  considerably 
later  date  and  do  not  allow  us  to  determine  whether  the 
convents  referred  to  held  their  lectures  continuously.  In  1476 
a  friar  of  Chester,  Thomas  Roberts,  was  appointed  professor 
of  the  liberal  arts  at  Glasgow.1  In  1505  Friar  Sebastian  of 
Worcester  became  a  student  of  arts  in  Oxford.2  But  judging 
from  the  analogy  of  other  provinces  it  would  appear  that 
probably  at  King's  Langley  the  young  friars  spent  all  their 
earliest  years  of  studies,  and  were  only  drafted  to  the  other 
convents  when  their  arts-studies  and  previous  education  had 
been  completed.  The  other  references,  however,  do  imply 
that  some  at  least  of  the  priories  had  their  own  arts-schools 
as  well.  Glasgow,  where  the  Dominicans  inaugurated  and 
sheltered  the  University,  may  well  have  needed  a  professor 
as  much  for  external  students  as  for  the  friars  themselves ; 
and  Oxford,  with  Cambridge,  were  unique  among  other  houses 
in  that  within  their  walls  the  whole  cycle  of  Dominican  learn- 
ing could  be  completed. 

The  next  stage  of  proficiency  above  grammar  and  arts,  was 
philosophy.  For  this  it  may  be  asserted,  again  on  the  analogy 
of  what  obtained  abroad,  there  were  separate  convents  where 
this  particular  branch  of  study  was  taught.  To  them,  when 
the  time  came,  such  students  were  transferred  as  were  deemed 
sufficiently  clever;  thus  was  Gerard  Coke  in  1397  sent  by  the 
Master-General  to  Lynn  that  for  two  years  he  might  pursue 
his  course    {auditor  philosophice).3    But  we  have  no  certain 

1  Add.  MSS.,  6716.  -  Ibid. 

3  Ibid. 


ftbe  Stufcies  53 

proof  of  the  existence  of  these  houses,  beyond  this  one  bare 
reference,  though  in  their  dispute  with  the  Oxford  University  the 
friars  claimed  to  have  studied  logic,  philosophy,  and  theology 
both  within  the  University  and  outside  it.  Still  here  again 
little  definite  conclusion  can  be  drawn,  for  they  may  refer  to 
their  own  lectures  in  Oxford  or  some  years  spent  abroad  or 
to  more  general  topics  which  might  be  learnt  in  the  ordinary 
priory  schools.  Elsewhere,  and  it  is  probable  that  the  English 
friars  followed  the  general  custom  of  the  Order,  the  study  of 
philosophy  occupied  another  two  years  of  the  students'  course. 

The  third  and  highest  stage  of  all  was,  of  course,  the 
study  of  theology.  For  this,  separate  convents  were  certainly 
marked  out  where  the  full  course  of  theology  could  be  regu- 
larly and  formally  conducted.  Each  province  had  to  have 
such  a  priory ;  indeed,  most  provinces  had  more  than  one. 
England,  which  in  no  way  at  all  fell  behind  the  rest  in  intel- 
lectual activity,  and,  indeed,  could  be  rivalled  only  by  France, 
had  several  which  may  well  have  been  grouped  under  the 
various  visitations  into  which  this  Province  was  divided ;  for 
since  there  were  over  fifty  priories  in  England  and  Wales 
their  effective  government  and  organization  became  an 
extremely  difficult  matter.  Hence  the  country  was  divided 
into  groups  of  convents,  which,  though  subject  to  the  pro- 
vincial and  the  chapter  in  all  legislative  matters,  were 
administered  and  regulated  in  their  executive  affairs  by  par- 
ticular friars  called  Visitors.  It  seems  a  plausible  theory 
that  each  of  these  visitations  had  its  own  house  of  solemn 
studies,  as  the  official  title  was.  There  is,  to  repeat,  no  proof 
of  this,  but  it  is  a  conjecture  which  bears  with  it  considerable 
probability.  We  read  of  a  master  of  studies  and  a  lector  of 
theology  (both  official  titles  in  the  houses  of  solemn  studies) 
at  Lincoln  in  1390;  of  a  regent  in  Hereford  in  1400;  of  a 
lector  and  doctor  of  theology  in  Guildford,  where  also  in 
1397  theological  students  are  expressly  mentioned.  Such 
students  were  also  to  be  found  at  Ipswich  and  Newcastle-on- 
Tyne  in  1397,  at  Norwich  in  1398,  at  London  in  1475. l  This 
would  satisfy  quite  fairly  the  desires  of  the  visitations  of 
London,  Salisbury  or  Exeter,  York,  Oxford,  and  Cambridge. 

These  last  two  houses  were  naturally  places  apart,  for  the 
Dominican  Order  placed  above  its  solemn  study  its  Studium 
Generate.  The  purpose  for  this  special  title  was  to  signify 
such  houses  as  would  be  of  advantage  to  the  whole  Order. 
London  and  Lincoln  and  Hereford  and  Newcastle-on-Tyne 
might  satisfy  the  requirements  of  the  English  Province  in  its 
normal  state,  and  might  quite  splendidly  equip  the  friar  to  be 
a  professor  for  the  pulpit ;  but  there  was  far  more  work  to  be 
done  than  that  or  than  could  be  possibly  completed  in  such 

1  Add.  MSS.,  6716. 


54  Ube  Bnglisfo  Dominicans 

small  compass  as  a  provincial  or  even  capital  town.  There 
was  need  of  the  universities  of  the  world.  For  it  must  be 
remembered  that  in  the  Middle  Ages  universities  and  learning 
generally  had  far  more  influence  over  public  opinion  and  far 
greater  national  importance  than  they  have  to-day.  Now  a 
professor  is  supposed  to  be  an  absent-minded  monomaniac 
who  considers  his  special  hobby  of  sole  interest  in  the  world. 
Then  a  professor  lectured  on  every  conceivable  subject  in. 
every  great  city  of  the  Western  world,  and  would  be  asked 
as  a  matter  of  course  to  advise  on  political  schemes  and 
ideas,  to  settle  international  disputes,  to  direct  the  theories 
of  coinage  and  exchange,  to  suggest  the  incidents  of  taxation. 
It  is  said  that  of  the  three  great  powers  that  between  them 
ruled  the  whole  of  Christendom  (namely,  the  Imperium  or 
civil  government,  the  Sarcerdotium  or  ecclesiastical  corpora- 
tion, and  the  Studium  or  universities)  the  most  powerful  by 
far,  taking  the  place  in  modern  life  held  by  press  and  parlia- 
ment, was  the  Studium. 

For  this  reason,  therefore,  quickened  by  the  added  sense  of 
the  need  which  each  friar  preacher  had  for  opportunities  of 
the  highest  educational  training,  the  Dominicans  set  on  the 
pinnacle  of  their  organization  the  university  convents.  The 
General  Chapter  of  1305  held  at  Genoa,  which  regulated  and 
set  right  so  much  that  had  been  found  unsatisfactory  in  the 
state  of  students  and  studies,  in  one  of  its  decrees  enables  us 
to  understand  the  order  and  arrangement  of  the  course  of 
studies:  "Concerning  those  sent  to  houses  of  study  we 
ordain : — First,  that  no  one  shall  be  sent  to  study  logic 
unless  he  shall  have  spent  well  and  religiously  at  least  two 
years  in  the  Order  or  else  has  come  later  in  life  to  the  Order 
after  having  already  studied  logic  when  he  was  in  the  world. 
Nor  shall  any  one  be  sent  to  study  natural  philosophy  unless 
he  has  studied  logic  for  at  least  three  years  either  in  the 
Order  or  in  the  world,  and  is  considered  on  the  evidence  of  a 
lector  and  master  to  be  sufficiently  learned.  Nor  shall  they 
be  sent  to  study  the  Book  of  the  Sentences  {i.e.,  theology) 
until  they  have  for  two  whole  years  studied  natural  philo- 
sophy. Moreover,  while  they  are  studying  logic  and  natural 
philosophy  they  shall  repeat  each  day  their  lectures  and  each 
week  shall  say  them  to  their  master,  who  shall  be  obliged  to 
hear  them.  No  one  shall  be  sent  to  a  house  of  general 
studies,  either  in  his  own  province  or  outside  of  it,  until  he 
shall  have  studied  the  logic  and  natural  philosophy  in  the 
order  just  laid  down,  and  shall  have  attended  lectures  in 
theology  in  some  special  convent  for  at  least  two  years ;  and 
unless  on  the  evidence  of  the  lector,  the  cursor,  and  the 
master  of  students,  there  is  real  hope  of  his  proving  an  apt 
and  capable  professor.  In  these  houses  of  general  studies 
let  the  master  of  students,  unless  legitimately  hindered,  hold 


Ube  Studies  55 

disputations  every  week  of  the  year  between  one  or  other  of 
his  pupils.  These  chief  lectors  shall  hold  their  classes  con- 
tinuously until  the  feast  of  St.  John  at  least.  All  the  brethren, 
too,  shall  go  each  day  to  the  schools  and  attend  the  lectures 
(unless  for  some  reasonable  cause  they  shall  have  been  dis- 
pensed by  the  prior  or  his  vicar)  under  penalty  of  being- 
deprived  for  that  day  of  wine  and  the  extra  course  at  dinner. 
And  if  priors  do  not  see  to  the  observance  of  these  penalties 
they  shall  be  obliged  themselves  to  undergo  them,  otherwise 
let  them  be  sharply  proceeded  against  on  the  evidence  of  the 
Visitors  at  the  Provincial  Chapter.  Further,  those  students 
who  are  found  by  the  provincial  to  be  exceedingly  negligent 
in  their  attendance  at  the  scholastic  exercises,  or  incapable, 
shall  be  dismissed  from  their  studies  and  some  other  occupa- 
tion shall  be  found  for  them." 

The  General  Chapter  of  Toulouse  in  1328,  lamenting  the 
decline  in  the  studies,  repeats  the  same  enactment:  "None 
should  be  promoted  to  holy  orders  nor  sent  to  study  logic 
until  they  are  proficient  in  grammar,  nor  should  they  be  sent 
to  study  philosophy  until  they  are  proficient  in  logic.  Nor 
should  any  be  sent  to  study  theology  until  they  are  considered 
proficient  in  grammar,  logic,  and  philosophy." 

These  houses  of  general  study  to  which  only  exceptional 
merit  gave  an  entrance  were  few  even  in  the  days  of  the 
Order's  greatest  glory.  England  had  from  the  first  Oxford 
and  then  Cambridge  as  well ;  in  France  and  the  other  pro- 
vinces were  a  few  more  as  Paris  and  Bologna.  There  were 
besides  a  few  convents  devoted  to  special  studies,  such  as 
the  priories  devoted  in  Spain  to  the  study  of  Arabic  and  the 
missionary  schools,  where  the  languages  of  the  East  were 
taught  to  those  volunteering  for  such  enterprises,  and  the 
convent  of  Sens,  where  numerous  friars  had  been  specially 
collected  to  work  on  a  revision  of  the  Latin  version  of  the 
Scriptures.  But  apart  from  these  exceptional  priories  the 
rest  of  the  province  was  symmetrically  arranged  for  the 
methodical  prosecution  of  study. 

Scripture,  which  meant  so  much  to  an  Order  devoted  to 
preaching,  was  a  lifelong  study,  and  it  seems  to  have  run 
concurrently  with  every  other  lesson.  It  was  taught  in  every 
friary,  almost  by  every  professor,  and  formed  no  doubt  the 
staple  subject  on  which  were  given  the  daily  lectures  in  every 
house  of  Dominicans  ordained  by  the  Constitutions. 

It  will  be  seen  then  that  there  was  a  regular  and  ordered 
course  through  which  each  student  passed.  He  entered  as  a 
novice  and  remained  for  two  years  without  at  all  advancing  in 
the  special  studies  of  the  priesthood.  Grammar  was  allowed, 
and  eventually  the  acquiring  of  foreign  languages,  for  without 
some  such  sufficiency  no  one  was  admitted  to  profession,  but 
the  main  portion  of  the  time  was  devoted  to  spiritual  direc- 


56  Zbc  JEnQlisft  Dominicans 

tion,  to  understanding-  the  Breviary  and  Missal,  to  grasping 
the  Constitutions  and  laudable  customs  of  the  Order,  to 
learning  by  heart  the  psalter  and  certain  portions  of  the 
Divine  Office.  It  was  rather  intended  as  the  chief  formative 
period  in  the  spiritual  development  of  the  novice  than  for 
acquaintance  with  scholastic  exercises  of  learning.  He  was 
being  broken  in  to  the  life  he  had  chosen,  got  into  the  right 
attitude  in  which  to  take  up  the  sacred  tools  he  was  later  to 
use.  Truth  may  be,  indeed  is,  the  most  fortifying  thing  alive: 
but  it  is  also  a  two-edged  sword,  to  be  swung  carefully, 
though  firmly,  with  dexterity  and  strength. 

The  opening  of  his  study  came  in  logic.  Here  there  were 
many  text-books  of  unequal  merit  which  brought  into  the 
mediaeval  times  the  wisdom  of  earlier  ages :  the  works  of 
Boethius,  the  Isagoge  of  Porphyry,  the  Summce  Logicales  of 
Pope  John  XXI,  the  Parva  Logicalia  of  Massilius  of  Inghen. 
From  these  he  passed  to  philosophy,  mental,  moral,  and 
physical,  which  began  at  first  to  be  largely  Platonist,  but  in 
the  end  became  wholly  Aristotelian.  Here  Boethius  and 
the  later  exponents,  representing  the  traditions  of  classic 
Greek,  gave  way  in  the  Dominican  Order  to  the  works  of 
Aristotle  and  to  their  direct  Christian  commentators  and 
exponents.  For  Theology,  the  great  author  was  Peter 
Lombard,  till  the  Sinnma  of  Aquinas  ousted  from  their  place 
the  Sentences.  From  the  Margarita  Philosophica  of  Gregor 
Reisch  (Strasbourg,  1504)  we  gather  the  orthodox  progress 
of  theological  learning.  The  frontispiece  exhibits  a  shrink- 
ing youth  led  by  Nicostrata  to  the  house  of  learning.  Here 
through  five  stories  he  achieves  his  complete  education.  A 
bachelor  of  arts,  rod  in  hand,  informs  him  of  the  wisdom  of 
Donatus,  then  Priscian  is  learnt ;  then  Aristotle  teaches  logic, 
Cicero  rhetoric,  Boethius  arithmetic.  The  fourth  story  adds 
music,  geometry,  and  astronomy.  Above,  Pliny  and  Seneca 
welcome  him,  halving  philosophy  as  physical  and  moral. 
Highest  of  all,  the  overbearing  form  of  Peter  Lombard 
dwarfs  into  insignificance  his  predecessors  and  lower  teachers. 
On  the  whole  it  is  a  perfect  representation  of  the  earliest 
wisdom  of  the  first  Dominicans. 

The  selection  of  students,  made  by  the  provincial  and  the 
Provincial  Chapter,  was  clearly  an  annual  arrangement.  The 
Visitors  reported  on  the  subjects  of  their  particular  visita- 
tion, and  took  the  witness  of  the  professors  as  to  the  qualifi- 
cations and  possibilities  of  each  young  friar.  Thus  gradually, 
according  to  merit,  the  students  passed  on  from  one  stage  to 
the  next.  Only  those  who  had  continuously  shown  promise 
were  taken  up  through  the  complete  course,  for  in  the  pro- 
vince there  were  many  positions  and  much  work  that  could 
be  accomplished  without  intellectual  activity,  and  for  such 
the  friars  who  had  failed  in  their  studies  were  selected,  the 


TOe  Studies  57 

object  of  good  government  being  to  secure  that  each  shall  be 
employed  in  the  work  most  congenial  to  him. 

But  over  and  above  the  normal  method  of  appointment  by 
provincial  and  chapter  there  were  other  local  customs. 
Under  date  1397  the  register  of  the  Master-General  (Blessed 
Raymond  of  Capua)  notifies  that  the  election  of  Friar  William 
Snayth  and  John  Ridisdal  to  the  studentships  of  Newcastle- 
on-Tyne,  made  by  the  sub-prior  and  brethren  of  that  convent, 
is  accepted  and  ratified,  though  only  a  few  days  later  it  is 
declared  that  "the  students  who  had  been  elected  in  the 
convent  of  Newcastle-on-Tyne  against  the  statutes  of  that 
convent  and  the  ordinances  of  the  Provincial  Chapters  were 
not  students."1  It  is  clear  also  from  the  whole  series  of 
registers  for  the  fourteenth  century  that  the  Masters-General 
continuously  used  the  power  allowed  them  by  the  constitu- 
tions of  the  Order,  and  frequently  themselves  interfered  to 
promote  or  cassate  students.  This  would  not  necessarily 
mean  that  a  report  from  each  province  had  to  be  sent  to 
them  annually,  but  only  that  appeals  were  frequently  made 
by  individuals  who  had  grown  dissatisfied  with  the  drudgery 
of  the  schools,  or  who,  on  the  other  hand,  were  out  of 
patience  with  the  want  of  recognition  of  their  brilliance.  In 
either  case  the  disappointed  friar  wrote  off  to  the  General  or 
the  Chapter-General  for  justice. 

The  appointment  of  the  professors  themselves  was  obviously 
an  even  more  important  business.  The  progress  of  the  studies 
of  the  Order  depended  very  largely  on  the  qualifications  and 
energy  of  the  staff  and  on  the  interest  which  they  themselves 
took  in  the  work.  Hence  all  the  commentators  on  the  Rule 
in  the  thirteenth  century  insisted  strongly  on  the  observance 
of  the  visitation  of  the  houses  of  study.  Novelties  and 
unorthodox  interpretations  were  rigorously  to  be  excluded 
from  the  lectures,  but  at  the  same  time  Humbert  de  Romans 
takes  care  to  point  out  the  need  for  the  professors  to  be 
original  in  their  way  of  lecturing.2  If  they  keep  only  to  the 
text  and  read  dry  disquisitions  no  one  will  be  inflamed  with 
the  desire  for  study.  Let  men  put  as  much  of  themselves  as 
possible  into  their  work.  Lectures,  indeed,  were  of  two  kinds ; 
there  were  solemn  or  ordinary  lectures  which  were  held  in  the 
mornings,  and  were  to  a  large  extent  verbal  commentaries  on 
the  text-book  given  with  minute  and  meticulous  care.  After 
St.  Thomas's  Summa  had  become  the  great  theological  treatise 
of  the  church,  General  Chapter  after  General  Chapter  is 
found  urging  the  professors  to  lecture  on  the  articles  and 
questions  'word  for  word.    Such  solemn   or  ordinary  lectures 

1  Add.  MSS.,  6716. 

2  Opera,  vol.  i,  p.  459;  Nihil  magnificum  docebit  quia  se  nihil  didicit. 
He  blames  those  who,  nil  de  suo  proferentes,  trust  only  to  the  words  of 
others. 


58  Zhc  English  Dominicans 

were  the  special  privilege  of  the  master,  and  supposed 
immense  learning.  After  the  article  had  been  read  thus  with 
detailed  analysis,  the  whole  body  of  doctrine  was  then  care- 
fully restated  so  that  the  whole  wood  as  well  as  each  tree 
might  be  seen  and  understood.  But  in  the  afternoon  took  place 
the  "  extraordinary  "  lectures,  which  were  given  cursorie — i.e., 
merely  a  popular  digest  and  disquisition  on  the  whole  matter 
without  much  attention  to  the  wording  of  the  author.  As  an 
example  of  this,  we  find  at  the  end  of  MS.  Royal  6,  CIX  (Brit. 
Mus.):  "The  price  of  this  book  was  paid  by  Friar  Nicholas 
Stremer  at  Evesham,  a.d.  1488,  who  at  the  time  was  cursory 
professor  at  London."  For  such  lectures  a  bachelor  sufficed, 
who  was  known  as  the  cursor.  Naturally  this  latter  form 
was  much  more  popular  than  the  more  solemn,  since  to  the 
eager  and  youthful  mind  it  suggested  more  tangible  and 
practical  views  of  the  abstract  science.  So  popular  indeed 
did  it  become  that  year  after  year  the  Chapters-General  pro- 
tested against  its  growing  importance.  The  text  was  for- 
gotten, the  masterpiece  unknown ;  the  notes  of  some  super- 
ficial lecturer  were  handed  down  and  became  the  easy  means 
of  acquiring  ready  knowledge. 

A  quotation  which  we  have  earlier  made  on  the  full  course 
to  be  pursued  by  Dominican  students  mentions  as  part  of  the 
system  the  need  for  "  repetitions."  This  was  ordained  to  be 
made  every  day ;  but,  in  addition,  every  week  there  was  to 
be  a  solemn  repetition  made  to  the  master  or  professor.  A 
code  of  the  Dainville  College  (R.  S.  Rait,  Life  in  a  Mediaeval 
University,  191 2,  Cambridge,  p.  145),  explains  what  this 
means.  Speaking  about  those  "  who  study  humane  letters," 
it  decrees:  "At  the  end  of  the  week,  that  is,  on  Friday  or 
Saturday,  they  shall  show  up  to  their  master  a  resume  of  all 
the  lectures  they  have  learned  that  week,  and  every  day 
before  they  go  to  the  schools  they  shall  be  bound  to  make 
repetitions  to  one  of  the  philosophers,  or  of  the  theologians 
whom  the  master  shall  choose  for  this  work."  Earlier  it 
speaks  of  the  same  system :  "  One  after  another  shall  repeat 
the  whole  lecture  so  that  each  of  them  may  know  it  well,  and 
the  less  advanced  shall  be  bound  daily  to  repeat  the  lectures 
to  the  more  proficient."  The  idea  of  teaching  in  the  Middle 
Ages  among  the  Dominicans  always  kept  its  main  purpose  in 
view,  namely,  to  produce  preachers.  Hence,  whatever  might 
keep  alive  a  ready  wit  and  a  power  of  quick  exposition  of 
some  point  or  argument,  was  obviously  the  best  possible 
training.  Mediaeval  teaching,  as  a  whole,  marched  in  the 
same  direction,  but  Dominican  teaching  was  even  more  de- 
voted to  this  system ;  the  disputes  of  Thomist  and  Scotist  are 
now  a  war  of  pens,  but  then  a  war  of  tongues. 

To  provide  for  the  staff  of  the  Stadia,  whether  merely  local 
or  the  larger  and  more  solemn  colleges,  was  again  the  work 


Ube  Studies  59 

of  provincial  and  chapter.  Every  year  the  Visitors  entered 
in  their  registers,  and  filed  for  reference  the  names  of  the 
more  brilliant  students  and  those  that  showed  promise  of 
professorial  success.  A  logic  lecturer  must  have  studied  logic 
for  two  years  and  natural  philosophy  for  another  two ;  a 
lecturer  in  natural  philosophy  had  further  to  have  completed 
his  two  years  of  theology;  a  lecturer  in  theology  (the  solemn 
morning-lecturer,  not  the  cursor  or  more  superficial  pro- 
fessor), besides  his  two  years  of  theology  had  to  have  secured 
two  years  of  study  in  a  house  of  general  studies;  a  lector 
principalis  or  first  lector  (though  this  does  not  necessarily 
imply  that  there  were  other  professors  with  him  in  the  same 
priory,  as  the  Acta  of  1305  distinctly  state)  had  in  addition  to 
all  this  to  have  lectured  in  a  stadium  generate  for  two  years, 
whether  as  bachelor,  or  cursor,  or  master.  In  England,  there- 
fore, it  was  incumbent  on  each  such  lector  to  have  first  gained 
a  degree  at  Oxford  or  Cambridge.  This  is  amply  borne  out 
by  the  register  of  the  Master-General,  for  in  1397  Friar  John 
Cawd  was  appointed  lector  principalis  at  Newcastle-on- 
Tyne;  but  earlier,  in  1394,  we  find  him  sent  to  Oxford  to 
lecture  on  the  Sentences.  Two  years  then  of  lecturing  had 
fitted  him  for  his  post  of  taking  charge  of  the  Newcastle 
Studium.  The  term  of  teaching  varied;  but  four  or  five  years 
was  considered  quite  long  enough.  The  chapter  of  1334 
judged  that  after  that  period  a  lecturer  had  a  tendency  to 
become  stale.  His  first  year  was  hard  work,  for  it  required 
energy  to  keep  pace  not  with  his  pupils'  learning,  but  with 
their  questions.  His  second  and  third  and  fourth  years 
matured  his  matter  and  gave  him  leisure  for  thought  and 
private  special  studying.  After  five  years  he  had  collected  his 
bundle  of  notes,  and  was  inclined  to  settle  down  to  an  easy 
life.  He  must  be  dug  up  and  sent  elsewhere,  or  even  removed 
from  academic  to  evangelistic  work.  The  students,  in  the 
democratic  earlier  days,  used  to  vote  on  their  professors,  and 
their  demand  for  an  extension  of  his  term  or  for  his  instant 
removal  was  then  carried  to  the  chapter.  But  this  occasioned 
over-much  quarrelling.  Professors  had  to  be  absent,  naturally, 
when  such  voting-  took  place;  but  evidently  they  had  their 
partisans  who  indulged  in  "disturbances,"  and  by  their  tur- 
bulent conduct  produced  the  rescinding  of  that  earlier  decree. 
In  any  case,  as  we  have  already  stated,  the  chapter  knew 
from  the  Visitors  which,  among  professors  and  students,  were 
best  qualified  for  their  work.  Not  only  was  their  sufficiency 
of  learning  taken  into  account,  but  their  aptitude  for  impart- 
ing knowledge  and  their  general  moral  character  were  men- 
tioned as  well.  The  chapter  then  had  the  appointment  of  all 
professors  in  their  hands,  though  the  Master-General  and  the 
Chapter-General  often  themselves  took  over  the  more  serious 
and  important  chairs.     Hardly  a  General  Chapter  from  the 


60  xrbe  Englisfo  Dominicans 

fourteenth  century  onwards,  but  gives  a  list  of  such  professors 
removed,  dismissed,  transferred.  But  in  1320  the  three  great 
convents  of  Paris,  Oxford,  and  Cambridge,  were  given  local 
autonomy.  They  could  co-opt  their  own  professors.  Still,  even 
so,  the  master  and  chapter  went  merrily  on,  interfering  when- 
ever they  thought  fit. 

Naturally  the  master  of  students  got  an  increasing  share 
in  the  power  of  appointment.  He  knew  best  both  pupils 
and  lecturers.  Their  privileges  were  in  his  care  against  the 
encroachment  of  prior  or  provincial.  Their  morals  were  en- 
trusted to  his  watchful  guidance.  The  whole  organized  scheme 
of  lectures,  the  time  devoted  to  each  subject,  the  matters 
treated  of,  the  disputations  held,  the  number  of  scholastic 
exercises  the  whole  year  through,  had  to  be  reported  by  him 
to  his  superior  authority,  to  the  Master-General  in  the  houses 
of  general  studies,  to  the  provincial  in  the  case  of  the  lesser 
studia.  He  could  not  appoint  or  determine  ;  but  he  had  neces- 
sarily to  report,  and  this  report  must  normally  have  had  con- 
siderable effect  on  the  career  of  professor  as  well  as  student. 
His  position  as  correspondent-manager  of  the  convent  studies 
was  thus  in  practice  very  powerful.  In  theory  he  was  inferior 
to  the  full  and  solemn  lecturer,  and  only  preceded  in  all 
official  functions  the  cursor.  Indeed,  the  cursor  most  ordinarily 
became  a  master  of  students  before  his  final  promotion, 
having  this  secretarial  and  critical  office  to  enable  him  to 
watch  more  experienced  professors  at  work,  and  so  escape 
their  failures  and  increase  their  output  of  success.  Yet  while 
thus  acting  as  secretary  to  the  staff,  he  had  duties  that  im- 
plied actual  lecturing  as  well;  but  the  subjects  assigned  to 
him  were  less  strenuous.  He  took  natural  philosophy  or  some 
treatise  of  "  Friar  Thomas,"  and  gave  personal  and  original 
(though  certainly  not  very  profound)  lectures  to  all  the  stu- 
dents of  the  house.  He  was  a  kind  of  general-knowledge 
professor  and  could  find  excuse  for  almost  any  subject  he 
chose  to  take.  The  mediaeval  quodlibets  or  questions  not  dis- 
cussed in  the  text-books,  represent,  in  all  probability,  the 
leisured  fancy  of  a  master  of  students. 

The  long  disputes  with  the  university  authorities  at  Oxford 
(which  the  next  chapter  will  detail)  produced  certain  results 
in  the  organized  scheme  of  English  Dominican  studies,  and 
modified  slightly  the  order  of  promotion.  Further  disputes 
between  the  English  friars  and  their  Scotch  and  Irish  brethren 
added  further  complications,  which  were  again  affected  by  a 
quarrel  with  the  Master-General  in  Rome.  Cardinals  in  Rome 
were  appointed  to  sit  on  commissions  and  sift  the  evidence. 
Royal  proclamations  forbade  certain  enactments  to  be  at- 
tended to  within  the  realm.  Provincials  refused  to  accept  the 
decisions  or  abide  by  the  dispensations  of  the  Master-General. 
The   Provincial  Chapter   in    1388  held    at  the  Blackfriars  of 


Ube  Studies  61 

Lincoln  formulated  definite  English  rules  which  every  master 
in  theology  was  to  swear  to  observe.  Condemned,  annulled, 
and  declared  void,  they  yet  appear  to  have  controlled,  though 
certainly  not  always,  the  higher  appointments  of  the  English 
friars  till  the  cataclasm  of  the  Reformation.  They  are  grouped 
under  four  headings  i1 

(a)  No  one  henceforth  is  to  attempt  the  Bachelauriat  of 
Theology  either  at  Oxford  or  Cambridge  before  he  has  for 
two  years  "  opposed  "  in  the  schools. 

(b)  No  one  is  to  be  promoted  to  the  mastership  by  letters 
procured  either  for  himself  or  another. 

(c)  No  one  is  to  be  promoted  to  any  place  already  held  by 
a  master  in  the  province,  nor  to  lecture  cursorie  nor  to  any 
university  either  in  Ireland  or  Scotland. 

(d)  No  one  is  to  be  a  master  unless  he  swears  to  the  above. 

These  were  of  course  intended  to  impose  limits  on  the 
power  of  the  Chapter-General  and  the  Master-General,  but 
the  English  friars  considered  that  their  peculiar  conditions 
required  some  such  legislation.  Many  disputes  followed, 
which  resulted  in  making  the  province  less  interested  in  the 
general  welfare  of  the  Order,  more  isolated,  and  thereby, 
perhaps,  more  easily  succumbing  to  the  blows  delivered  by 
Henry  VIII. 

Yet  before  the  English  Province  was  broken  up  by  the  Refor- 
mation Parliaments  it  had  performed  no  mean  task.  In  Canon 
Law  it  had  produced  Bromyard2  who  had  also  done  much  to 
expound  and  co-ordinate  the  civil  law.  He  was  one  of  those 
types  of  minds  which  revel  in  dictionaries  and  encyclopedias. 
He  drew  out  alphabetical  treatises  on  law,  and  worked  into 
the  same  handy  form  the  whole  matter  of  morals.  Hotham,3 
intellectually  the  most  brilliant  member  of  the  Pre-Reforma- 
tion  Province,  in  this  order  of  study  is  responsible  only  for  a 
famous  tractate  or  Oratio  in  French  on  the  claim  of  Edward  I 
to  the  Scotch  Crown.  It  was  considered  by  the  English  critics 
(though  probably  not  by  the  Scotch  ones)  a  masterly  and 
convincing  array  of  arguments.  It  is  curious  that  Nicholas 
Trivet4  and  Robert  Holcot,5  who  both  wrote  voluminously 
and  were  actually  the  sons  of  English  judges,  should  have 
left  civil  and  canon  law  severely  alone.  Hotham  took  part 
in  the  controversy  on  the  Beatific  Vision,  and  defended  the 
Thomistic  position.  He  was  ably  seconded  by  Robert  Orford,6 
and  was  connected  as  the  next  chapter  will  show  with  the 
lively  dispute  that  brought  poor  Claypole  to  ruin.     Hugh  of 

1  Mortier,  vol.  Hi.  p.  655.  Note  that  clause  (b)  was  solemnly  ratified  by 
the  Gen.  Chap,  of  Frankfort  (Reichert,  vol.  iii,  p.  95). 

2  Echard,  vol.  i,  p.  700.  3  Ibid.,  vol.  i,  pp.  385,  459. 

4  Ibid.,  vol.  i,  p.  561 ;  vol.  ii,  p.  819. 

5  Ibid.,  vol.  i,  p.  629;  vol.  ii,  p.  821.  6  Ibid.,  vol.  i,  p.  431. 


62  zrbe  EiiQlisb  Dominicans 

Ducton,1  a  Cambridgeshire  man  and  an  Oxford  professor,  com- 
piled (1339)  a  whole  book  on  The  Controversies  of  the  Schools, 
a  handbook  by  a  warrior  for  warriors.  Kilvvardby,"  Oxford 
professor,  provincial,  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  Cardinal 
Bishop  of  Porto,  belonged  to  the  pre-Thomistic  school  and 
violently  attacked  the  new  and  growing  philosophy.  But 
William  of  Macclesfield  3  and  Thomas  Jorz i  (both  of  whom 
were  also  created  Cardinals)  defended  with  able  wit  the 
younger  generation.  Of  William  Andrews  of  Guildford,  a 
theologian  and  Bishop  of  Meath,  Ware  pathetically  remarks 
that  like  Socrates  he  was  expected  to  write  many  books,  yet 
he  wrote  none.  Another  well-known  writer  on  theological 
subjects  was  Thomas  Claxton  5  of  Boston  Priory,  an  Oxford 
graduate  and  a  strenuous  opponent  of  Wycliffe.  His  com- 
mentary on  the  Sentences  was  found  in  1681  in  the  library  of 
S.  Maria  Novella  in  Florence.  In  the  first  volume  was  an 
inscription,  stating  that  it  had  been  bought  for  50  ducats,  a 
goodly  price,  by  Master  Laurence  Gheradino,6  O.P.,  when 
he  was  in  England.  This  Dominican  friar  had  studied  in 
England  and  was  confessor  to  Queen  Margaret  of  Anjou. 
With  her  he  went  into  exile  in  France  and  was  dismissed  in 
1470  when  she  had  finally  lost  heart  in  her  attempts  to 
recover  her  husband's  kingdom.  During  his  study  days  he 
no  doubt  learnt  what  the  English  friars  had  to  give,  and 
accepted  the  teaching  of  their  school,  for  they  had  a  distinct 
body  of  doctrine  and  a  powerful  influence  in  the  scholastic 
world.  Alone  among  the  followers  of  St.  Thomas,  the  English 
Dominicans  taught  the  Immaculate  Conception,  professedly 
having  learnt  it  from  the  writings  of  Aquinas.  But  here  no 
doubt  as  elsewhere  they  were  considerably  affected  by  English 
traditions,  for  more  here  than  elsewhere  was  that  belief  piously 
inculcated.  It  is  probable,  too,  that  the  province  as  a  whole 
clung  tenaciously  to  the  Thomistic  side  of  the  controversy 
with  the  Scotists,  though  earlier  they  had  defended  the  older 
Platonism  against  the  Aristotelian  tendency  of  the  new  gener- 
ation. 

In  Scripture  also  the  English  Dominicans  were  abreast  of 
their  fellow  friars.  Endless  commentaries  and  postillae  are  to 
be  found  in  old  college  libraries  at  Oxford  and  Cambridge 
and  across  the  seas,  which  were  composed  by  members  of 
the  province.  Trivet,  whose  genius  is  of  course  most  famous 
in  the  line  of  history,  wrote  also  a  treatise  on  the  Psalter, 
dedicated  to  his  provincial,  John  of  Bristol.  Holcot's  com- 
mentary on  the  book  of  Wisdom  is  a  classic,  which  has  fre- 
quently been  reprinted.  Dry  as  it  often  is,  a  certain  distinction 
of  style  gives  it  a  dignity  and  worth  which  lifts  it  above  the 

1   Echard,  vol.  i,  p.  595.  '  Ibid.,  vol.  i,  p.  374. 

3  Ibid.,  vol.  i,  p.  493.  *  Ibid.,  vol.  i,  p.  508. 

5  Echard,  vol.  i,  p.  730.  ''  Ibid.,  vol.  ii,  p.  825. 


XT  be  Studies  63 

common  stream  of  such  commentaries.  Indeed  hardly  a  friar 
lectured  at  all,  or  preached,  or  wrote,  and  did  not  include 
among  his  literary  remains  a  commentary  on  the  Scriptures. 
The  Middle  Ages  inherited  few  great  books  or  great  classics, 
and  had  few  masterpieces  within  its  reach,  but  what  it  had 
it  appreciated.  The  Bible,  the  book  of  the  Sentences,  the 
writings  of  Aristotle,  later  the  Summa  and  the  Divina 
Commedia,  were  almost  alone  their  whole  stock  in  trade ; 
but  these  were  thoroughly  known  and  valued.  So  full  had 
become  the  knowledge  that  was  then  possible,  that  the  com- 
mentaries were  often  dull  repetitions  or  fantastic  nonsense. 
Everything  had  been  said,  the  books  were  known  by  heart, 
the  meaning  was  traditional ;  hence  the  ending  of  the  scho- 
lastic age  was  pitiful,  pathetic.  A  vigorous,  exceptional  in- 
telligence like  Cardinal  Cajetan  could  make  both  Bible  and 
Summa  the  source  of  a  subtle  and  original  speculation,  that 
mark  him  as  the  creator  of  modern  scripture-exegesis  and 
modern  philosophic  speculation.  But  Cardinal  Cajetan  was  a 
man  apart. 

The  great  English  contribution  to  Scripture-study  was  the 
Concordance.  Hugh  of  S.  Cher,1  Provincial  of  France  and 
the  first  Dominican  Cardinal,  had  deep  interest  in  Biblical 
learning.  With  much  boldness  and  some  success  he  attempted 
to  correct  according  to  the  original  Greek  and  Hebrew,  the 
received  text  of  the  Vulgate,  called  the  Exemplar  Parisiense. 
It  was  an  enormous  undertaking  for  that  age,  which  had  little 
critical  apparatus,  or  means  of  achieving  any.  Roger  Bacon, 
who  confessed  that  he  did  nothing  himself,2  laughed  at  the 
result ;  our  [own  generation  has  appreciated  better  its  extra- 
ordinary value.  Then  S.  Cher  set  to  work  on  the  first  con- 
cordance, which  gave  references  to  every  word  in  the  Bible, 
grouping  the  words  alphabetically,  and  showing  the  places 
where  they  occurred.  This  idea  was  seized  upon  by  the 
English  Dominicans  under  the  direction  of  John  of  Dar- 
lington,3 Richard  of  Stavensby,  and  Robert  of  Croydon,4  and 
these  three  drew  up  the  arrangement  still  in  use.  They 
quoted  not  the  word  simply  as  the  French  friars  had  done, 
but  the  whole  phrase  and  thus  gave  at  a  glance,  not  only  the 
bare  reference,  but  the  context,  and  thereby  the  precise  sense 
which  the  word  bore  in  the  passage. 

The  English  Province  therefore  took  its  place  with  the  rest 
of  the  Order  in  its  organized  establishment  of  studies.  At 
Oxford  first  the  friars  settled  in  a  permanent  priory,  at 
Oxford  were  their  first  public  lectures,  their  first  professors. 
They  began  their  real  work  in  England  by  opening  schools 
of  theology  and  philosophy.  Gradually  over  the  whole  of 
Christendom  the  Dominicans  drew  up  a  system  of  learning 

1  Echard,  vol.  i,  p.  149.  -  Opus  Tertium  (R.S.),  p.  13. 

3  Echard,  vol.  i,  p.  395.  4  Ibid.,  vol.  i,  p.  209. 


64  Uhc  Bnglisb  Dominicans 

to  meet  their  own  requirements,  and  to  furnish  the  Church 
with  those  schools  of  Christian  learning-  which  without  them 
and  before  their  time  she  had,  since  the  University  of  Paris 
began,  found  herself  unable  to  establish.  In  England  no  less 
than  abroad,  the  cathedral  towns  found  in  the  Dominican 
Priories  professors  whose  lectures  supplied  their  own  needs. 
When  the  friars'  school  at  Hereford  languished,  it  was  the 
Dean  of  the  Cathedral  who  wrote  to  the  provincial  to  com- 
plain.1 They  took  a  leading  part  in  the  learned  society  of  the 
West.  But  also  within  their  own  ranks  they  built  up  a  course 
of  study  which  made  each  friar  a  well-cultured  man.  Grammar, 
logic,  philosophy,  theology,  made  his  mind  critical,  ready, 
full.  If  these  studies  were  passed  with  brilliance,  then  before 
the  eager  student  were  placed  the  splendid  schools  of  Oxford 
and  Cambridge.  It  is  true  that  this  was  a  fine  theory  which 
practice  did  not  always  confirm.  Friars  there  were  (in  the 
face  of  mediaeval  literature  it  cannot  be  denied)  ignorant, 
narrow,  foolish.  But  Wycliffe  in  his  day  accused  them  only  of 
socialism  or  communism,  and  traced  their  political  theories, 
not  to  their  ignorance,  but  to  their  learning;  and  Piers 
Plowman  as  rudely  rates  them  for  thus  following  Plato  and 
Aristotle. 

The  Philobiblon,  their  severest  critic,  acknowledges  their 
intellectual  supremacy  among  the  religious  orders  of  the 
fourteenth  century  in  England. 

1  Reliquary,  1882,  p.  23. 


CHAPTER  IV 
AT  OXFORD 

THE  intellectual  history  of  the  province  naturally 
is  grouped  round  the  priory  at  Oxford.  Here  was 
the  supreme  training-  ground  of  the  young-  friars, 
the  summit  of  the  organized  studies  of  the  English 
Dominicans.  Here,  too,  was  established  the  first 
Dominican  priory  in  these  islands,  for  on  the  arrival  of  the 
little  band,  despatched  as  the  last  official  act  of  St.  Dominic 
and  reaching  England  in  the  first  days  of  August,  or  at  the 
end  of  July,  it  moved  from  Canterbury  to  London  and  from 
London  to  Oxford  on  August  the  15th,  exactly  nine  days  after 
St.  Dominic's  death.  The  purpose  of  the  Order  is  evident 
from  the  actions  of  these  friars,  since  they  began  at  once  to 
open  public  schools  in  connection  with  the  University.  It  is 
their  second  recorded  official  appearance.  One  of  their  number 
had  preached  before  Cardinal  Stephen  Langton  at  Canterbury, 
and  had  thereby  secured  for  them  the  patronage  of  that  great 
prelate.  Now  they  had  begun  to  teach,  for  it  must  be  re- 
membered that  the  motive  of  the  children  of  St.  Dominic  has 
been  twofold  (a)  to  teach  truth  by  preaching;  (b)  to  preach 
truth  by  teaching,  to  announce  the  word  of  God  from  the 
pulpit  to  the  people,  and  from  the  professor's  chair  to  the 
people's  leaders.  For  this  double  object  then  a  university 
was  of  necessity,  first  that  the  friars  might  learn  and  secondly 
that  they  might  teach. 

This  first  settlement  at  Oxford  was  made  within  the  Jewry.1 
At  once  benefactors  came  to  their  aid,  especially  the  canons 
of  St.  Frideswide  and  the  Abbot  of  Westminster,  while  all 
along  the  royal  munificence,  as  elsewhere  in  England,  was 
their  continual  support.  This  small  oratory  with  its  two  bells 
and  its  tiny  churchyard  was  dedicated  to  Our  Lady,  as  it  was 
on  the  feast  of  her  Assumption  that  they  had  come,  and  her 
figure  remained  engraved  on  their  seal  even  after  their  second 
priory  was  built.  Already  within  twenty-five  years  of  their 
arrival,  the  Oxford  friars  had  outgrown  the  small  limits  set 
by  the  canons  of  St.  Frideswide  for  their  domain  in  the 
Jewry,  their  work  had  increased,  their  numbers  had  multi- 
plied, their  importance  in  the  divinity  schools  of  the  Uni- 
versity had  also  evidently  become  manifest;  by  the  King's 
appointment  their  new  abode  was  fixed  on  a  river  island  in 
the  south  of  the  town,  outside  the  south  gate.  Henry  III 
gave  the  land  itself,  or  at  least  his  rights  over  the  land,  while 
the  two  chief  personages  then  living  in  the  neighbourhood, 
Isabel  de  Vere,  the  widowed  Countess  of  Oxford,  and 
Walter  Mauclerk,  Bishop  of  Carlisle  and  finally  a  Dominican 
himself,  by  their  gifts  of  money,  meadows,  and  kind  were 

1  Reliquary,  Jan. -April,  1883. 
F 


66  zbc  jEnglfsb  Dominicans 

looked  upon  as  the  founders  of  the  second  priory.  From 
1238  to  1245  the  building-  went  on;  then  on  the  feast  of  All 
Saints  in  solemn  procession  the  friars  went  out  from  their 
miniature  priory  and  took  possession  of  the  fine  new  place, 
though  with  a  sentiment  which  we  are  apt  to  imagine  to  be 
purely  modern,  they  waited  till  the  feast  of  the  Assumption, 
1246,  before  celebrating  Mass  in  the  church.  It  was  exactly 
twenty-five  years  to  the  day  since  they  had  said  Mass  first  of 
all  in  the  city  of  Oxford.  Not  till  1262,  on  15  June,  was  the 
church  consecrated  by  the  diocesan,  Bishop  Benedict  de 
Gravesend  of  Lincoln. 

But  it  is  not  the  history  of  the  priory  that  will  be  recorded 
here,  since  the  history  of  each  religious  house  is  monotonously 
similar.  It  is  rather  the  story  of  the  schools  that  is  of  in- 
terest, for  by  special  and  unusual  licence  (for  the  sake  of  John  of 
S.  Giles,  a  great  English  professor  who,  according  to  Nicholas 
Trivet,1  in  the  midst  of  an  impassioned  harangue  to  an 
assembly  of  clergy  at  Paris,  had  left  the  pulpit  to  receive  the 
Dominican  habit  and  had  returned  clothed  in  white  and  black 
to  finish  his  oration),  in  their  earliest  days  the  friars  had  two 
schools  in  the  Jewry.  This  privilege  was  renewed  to  the 
second'  priory,  where  the  solemn  acts  of  divinity  were  per- 
formed in  the  church  and  chapter-house,  and  those  of  philo- 
sophy were  held  in  the  priory.  By  Papal  ordinance  the  friars 
had  licence  here  to  review,  correct,  and  promulgate  official 
collections  of  Canon  Law.  Thrice  were  their  members 
Chancellors  of  the  University,  Simon  of  Bovill  in  1238  and 
1244,  and  John  Bromyard,  according  to  Antony  Wood  the 
only  man  to  his  knowledge  who  had  ever  been  Chancellor 
both  of  this  and  Cambridge  University.  Further  it  will  be 
remembered  that  in  1246  the  General  Chapter  ordained  that 
the  Oxford  house  should  become  a  Studium  Generale  for  the 
whole  Order.  Up  till  1261  nothing  was  done,  so  the  chapter 
of  that  year  deposed  the  provincial  for  his  negligence  or  dis- 
obedience and  insisted  upon  the  immediate  establishment  of 
this  solemn  study  centre.  The  new  provincial  was  himself  a 
lecturer  of  European  repute,  Robert  Kilwardby,  and  his 
energy  was  certainly  devoted  to  the  chapter's  designs.  New 
building  items  appear  in  the  royal  account  books,  new  gener- 
osity and  princely  munificence.  The  foreign  friars  were  housed 
and  lodged  and  apparently  heartily  disliked.  But  before  racial 
disturbances  had  time  to  occur,  a  crisis  almost  overwhelmed 
the  Dominican  schools  in  Paris  and  Oxford. 

The  history  of  Christendom  had  made  the  intellectual 
apologists  of  the  earliest  ages  almost  wholly  of  Eastern  train- 
ing, and  had  by  a  series  of  accidental  occurrences  resulted  in 
the  statements  of  theology  being  couched  in  the  formularies 
of  Plato.  These  were  a  little  later  re-stated  with  much  vigour 
1  A?ma!es,  p.  211. 


u 


^~ 

cd 

hJ 

O 

— 

z 

o 

< 

y, 

c/3 

<< 

■ ) 

o 

A 

[To  face  p.  66 


Ht  ©tfovb  67 

of  thought  and  beauty  of  language  by  the  greatest  of  all  the 
fathers,  S.  Augustine  of  Hippo.  The  schools  of  the  West 
continued  that  tradition  for  another  five  hundred  years  in  a 
condition  of  stiff  apathy.  Then  came  a  renaissance  of  study, 
dawning  with  the  Carolingian  glories  and  culminating  in  the 
band  of  thinkers  who  can  be  conveniently  grouped  round  the 
names  of  Abelard  and  St.  Bernard.  For  another  century  this 
revival  lasted  till  the  rise  of  the  friars,  who,  coming  to  win 
back  the  universities  to  the  Church,  again  stimulated  the  in- 
telligence of  Europe.  Hence  once  more  the  philosophy  of  the 
Faith  began  to  be  systematized  and  re-stated  in  terms  of  yet 
more  developed  Platonism. 

Yet  all  the  while,  though  impotent  and  commonly  neglected, 
the  philosophy  of  Aristotle  still  remained  lingering  among 
lonely  writers.  With  his  deep  literary  and  historic  insight 
and  his  attempt  at  grasping  the  development  of  doctrine, 
S.  Thomas  Aquinas  notes  the  phenomenon:  "For  Basil  and 
Augustine  and  most  of  the  saints  followed,  in  those  parts  of 
philosophy  which  are  not  concerned  with  actual  truths  of 
faith,  the  opinion  of  Plato.  .  .  .  Denis,  however,  almost 
always  follows  Aristotle."  l  This  so-called  Denis  the  Areopa- 
gite  and,  in  a  large  sense,  Boethius,  were  both  Aristotelians. 
Among  the  Arabs,  too,  and  Moors  who  hung  on  the  fringe  of 
Europe,  the  philosophy  of  the  Stagyrite  reigned  supreme. 
Then  slowly  it  filtered  through  into  the  Christian  schools. 
Passing  up  through  Spain  it  reached  Paris,  and  at  once 
occasioned  a  stir  among  the  professorial  body.  Denounced 
by  the  theologians  it  took  refuge  in  the  schools  of  arts,  where 
it  was  enthusiastically  welcomed  by  the  young  laymen  who 
were  led  captive  by  its  clearness  of  expression,  the  symmetry 
of  its  design,  and  the  scientific  experiments,  which  it  advocated 
and  entailed.  Then  to  the  astonishment  and  bewilderment  of 
traditionist  professors,  the  leaders  of  the  Dominican  theological 
schools  in  Paris  and  Cologne  announced  themselves  converts 
to  its  teaching ;  Albert  the  Great  and  Thomas  Aquinas 
pledged  their  reputations  in  its  support.  At  once  an  attack 
against  the  friars  broke  out  with  violence.  The  older  pro- 
fessors within  and  without  the  Order  bitterly  assailed  the 
new  doctrine  as  subversive  of  the  traditions  and  expressions 
of  the  Fathers.  Even  the  newer  professors,  men  like  Siger  of 
Brabant,  for  whom  in  the  sarcastic  language  of  Albert  the 
Great  "Aristotle  was  a  god,"2  disliked  this  strange  and 
third  party  which  criticized  with  keenness  "the  Master  of 
those  that  know,"  for  both  Aquinas  and  Albert,  while  accept- 
ing the  reasoning  of  Aristotle,  protested  against  any  assump- 
tion of  authority  based  on  the  mere  name  of  the  philosopher. 
Both  Plato  and  Aristotle  were  to  be  reverenced,  but  neither 

1  In  Sent,,  bk.  ii,  dist.  14,  qn.  1,  art.  2.  Cf.  Sutnma  Theologica,  part,  i, 
qn.  84,  art.  5.  2  In  Physics,  bk.  viii,  cap.  i,  §.  14. 


68  zhc  finglfsb  Dominicans 

to  be  absolutely  followed,  for  the  mind  was  to  be  careful  to 
seek  truth.  "The  study  of  philosophy,"  noted  Aquinas,  "is 
not  to  find  out  what  men  have  thought  but  to  discover  what 
is  the  truth."  '  Albert  publicly  proclaimed  that  in  matters  of 
faith  and  morals  he  would  follow  the  teaching  of  Augustine 
against  every  pagan  philosopher,  in  medicine  he  would  prefer 
Galen  or  Hippocrates,  and  in  natural  science  Aristotle  to  all 
the  fathers  of  the  Church.2  It  was  an  obvious  position  to  take 
up,  but  the  University  was  in  a  ferment  and  utterly  distracted. 
The  theological  students,  at  the  time  (according  to  Roger 
Bacon,3  who  agreed  with  their  attitude,  the  least  reputable  of 
the  members  of  the  University)  were  plainly  opposed  to  the 
new  teaching;  while  the  "artists"  grew  enthusiastically 
devoted  to  the  Dominicans.  After  Aquinas's  death,  they 
petitioned  the  General  Chapter  of  the  Order  to  give  them  the 
manuscripts  of  "  Friar  Thomas,  which  he  expressly  promised 
us,"  and  referred  to  the  attempts  they  had  made  to  have  him 
left  at  Paris  and  not  removed  to  Italy  in  his  last  years.  They 
begged,  too,  that  among  them  might  lie  his  precious  relics.4 
The  foremost  Dominican  professors,  men  who  had  fought  for 
the  liberty  of  the  friars'  schools,  were  scandalized  at  this  new 
venture  and  predicted  the  utter  collapse  of  the  whole  organi- 
zation of  learning.  And  the  strife,  begun  on  the  continent, 
spread  to  Oxford. 

Here  at  first  the  Dominicans,  bred  to  the  older  views,  re- 
fused an  entrance  to  the  Aristotelian  categories.  Robert 
Kilwardby,  and,  most  respected  by  all,  John  of  S.  Giles,  would 
have  no  quarter  shown  it.  The  latter  especially  rebuked  those 
who,  "  even  in  theology  will  not  be  separated  from  Aristotle, 
putting  tinsel  in  the  place  of  gold."5  The  Franciscans,  Alex- 
ander Hales,  Roger  Bacon,  John  Peckham,  Duns  Scotus, 
whose  names  still  carry  weight  in  theology,  never  relinquished 
their  opposition,  and  created  with  vigour  a  warlike  rival 
teaching.  Kilwardby,  indeed,  as  Archbishop  of  Canterbury 
and  an  Oxford  professor,  though  himself  a  Dominican,  as- 
sembled a  council  at  Oxford,  and  condemned  a  series  of 
propositions  which  included  some  of  the  principles  of  S. 
Thomas,  but  in  order  to  justify  his  action  the  Archbishop 
added  other  doctrines  which  were  thoroughly  unorthodox, 
and  had  been  advanced  by  some  brilliant  Paris  theologians 
fascinated  by  the  Moorish  commentators  of  Aristotle.  Simul- 
taneously, and  therefore  it  may  be  supposed  by  agreement, 
the  Thomistic  system  was  condemned  by  the  Bishop  in  Paris 
on  7  March  (the  anniversary  of  the  saint's  death),  and  by  the 
Archbishop    in  Oxford    on    18    March    1278.      Kilwardby    of 

1  De  Coelo  et  Mundo,  bk.  i,  cap.  xxii. 

2  In  Se?it,  bk.  ii,  dist.  2,  qn.  13,  art.  2.     3  Opera  Inedita  (R.S.),  p.  412. 

4  Denifle,  Carhdarium  Universitatis  Parisiensis,  vol.  i,  pp.  504,  505. 

5  Mandonnet,   Siger  de  Brabant  (1911),   p.  233;  Revue  Thomiste  (1896)^ 
p.  139;  Archiv  fur  Litt.  u.  kirchengeschichte,  vol.  v,  p.  611,  etc. 


Ht  ©£fort>  69 

Canterbury,  and  Stephen  Tempier  of  Paris  had  probably  been 
fellow  students,  and  were  undoubtedly  well  known  to  each 
other.  At  any  rate  the  old  theologians  of  both  universities 
were  only  too  glad  to  be  revenged  on  the  new  school  by  pre- 
tending to  identify  it  with  the  heterodox  speculation  of  the 
Averroists.  Godfrey  de  Fontaines,  though  an  opponent,  pro- 
tested at  the  time  against  this  as  wholly  inexcusable  and  "  in 
prejudice  of  a  teaching  most  helpful  to  a  student,  to  wit,  that 
of  the  most  reverend  and  excellent  doctor,  Friar  Thomas, 
who,  by  the  said  propositions,  was  most  unjustly  defamed."1 

In  the  face  of  this  storm  Rome  was  silent.  The  Papal 
throne  was  vacant,  and  the  College  of  Cardinals  forbade  any 
further  proceedings  till  a  Pope  should  be  elected;  such,  at 
least,  is  Peckham's  statement,  who  was  certainly  present  in 
the  Eternal  City  in  1278,  and  may  well  have  had  first-hand 
information  of  the  designs  of  the  leading  prelates.2 

But  the  Dominican  Order,  as  a  whole,  had  already  been 
won  to  the  side  of  its  most  brilliant  sons.  The  chapter  of 
1278  was  shocked  at  Kilwardby's  action  and  sent  over  at 
once  two  lectors  to  England  to  repair  this  "scandal  to  the 
Order."  Within  a  few  months  the  Pope  was  prevailed  upon 
to  remove  the  Archbishop  from  England,  and  to  appoint  him 
to  a  suburban  see  of  Rome  with  the  dignity  of  Cardinal.  At 
the  Papal  Court  he  could  not  do  as  much  harm  to  the  new 
Dominicans  as  in  his  place  of  authority  in  England.  At  least, 
so  some  explain  Kilwardby's  promotion,  though  others  as 
conjecturally  suppose  it  to  be  due  to  political  reasons.  Yet 
John  Peckham,  a  far  more  fierce  opponent,  a  Franciscan  and 
another  Oxford  graduate,  was  nominated  his  successor.  Of 
bustling  activity,  which  brought  him  into  frequent  quarrels 
with  every  one  he  came  across  from  the  King  downwards, 
"pompous  and  fussy,"  in  Trivet's  phrase,3  the  new  Archbishop 
threw  himself  into  the  struggle.  He  had  known  Friar  Thomas 
at  Paris,  had  heard  him  lecture,  and  had  on  one  occasion 
publicly  defended  him  from  the  attacks  of  the  Dominicans. 
At  least  so  he  himself  asserted,  though  one  witness  at  the 
Process  of  Canonization  told  the  story  quite  differently,  for 
with  exquisite  humour  he  notes  how  on  no  occasion  did  the 
Saint  ever  show  loss  of  temper,  "  even  when  John  of  Peck- 
ham  impertinently  tried  to  set  him  right."  4  Acting  under  the 
protection  of  this  Archbishop,  an  Oxford  Franciscan,  William 
de  la  Mare,  compiled  one  hundred  and  seventeen  annotations 
to  the  works  of  Aquinas  (forty-seven  against  the  Summa,  Pars 
Prima,  twelve  against  the  Prima  Secundae,  sixteen  against 
the    Secunda  Secundae,    twenty-four    against  the    Questiones 

1  Siger  de  Brabant,  p.  231. 

2  Martin  (London,  1884),  Register  Epistotarnm  Fratrisjoannis  Peckham, 
vol.  iii,  p.  866;  Annates  Francisc,  vol.  Hi,  p.  361. 

3  Annates,  p.  300. 

4  Regist.  Peckham,  vol.  iii,  p.  866;  Acta  S.S.  March,  vol.  vii,  p.  712. 


70  Zfte  Bnolisb  Dominicans 

Disputatae,  nine  against  the  Quodlibita,  and  nine  against  the 
Commentary  on  the  First  Book  of  the  Sentences),  impugning 
their  orthodoxy.  This  book  was  officially  sanctioned  by  the 
General  Chapter  of  the  Friars  Minors  held  in  1282  at  Strass- 
burg.1  The  principle  involved  in  this  attack  was  the  same 
as  in  the  previous  lists  of  Kilwardby  and  Tempier,  an  identifica- 
tion of  teaching  in  S.  Thomas  and  Averroes  chiefly  by  means 
of  a  similarity  of  phrasing,  so  that  the  unity  of  forms,  which 
was  one  philosophic  tenet  of  the  new  scholasticism  against 
the  old,  might  be  deliberately  tangled  with  the  unity  of  in- 
telligence whereby  Averroes  and  his  defenders  endeavoured 
to  unite  in  a  common  mind  and  soul  the  whole  intelligent 
creation.  The  philosophic  point  is  subtle,  and  to  those  un- 
accustomed to  scholasticism  apparently  futile,  since  it  con- 
cerns the  number  of  created  forms  which  each  unit  can  be 
said  to  comprise;  but  as  it  enters  so  largely  into  the  names 
even  of  the  polemical  tracts  of  that  date  the  fact  of  it  at  least 
must  be  remembered  in  this  controversy. 

The  Franciscan  challenge  was  at  once  taken  up  by  the 
Oxford  Dominicans.  William  of  Macclesfield,  one  of  the  fore- 
most friars  of  his  Order,  subsequently  by  Pope  Benedict  XI 
created  Cardinal  (though  Nicholas  Trivet,  who  knew  him 
well,  first  as  his  pupil,  then  as  his  fellow  professor,  tells  us 
that  he  died  before  he  received  the  news  of  his  promotion)," 
replied  in  1282  with  a  volume  which  took  each  argument  of 
de  la  Mare  and  refuted  it  at  length.  The  immense  popularity 
of  this  work  in  the  later  Middle  Ages  has  preserved  far  more 
widely  than  the  original  the  propositions  of  the  attack.  Robert 
of  Orford  and  Thomas  of  Sutton  (whose  work  has  actually 
been  attributed  by  some  writers  to  S.  Thomas  himself)  joined 
in  the  fray.  The  attempt  of  all  three  was  frankly  to  justify  the 
writings  of  Aquinas,  and  for  (that  reason  the  controversy 
raged  round  the  actual  text  of  the  Summa  and  his  other 
treatises.  Macclesfield  especially  declared  in  one  passage : 
"It  is  to  be  noted  that  all  that  the  Minors  allege  against 
Thomas  can  be  answered  by  referring  to  his  actual  words, 
though  for  some  of  the  objections  it  is  necessary  to  have  all 
his  writings,"  a  question,  that  is,  not  of  isolated  quotation 
but  of  the  whole  context,  and  of  the  critical  comparison  of 
separate  passages.  Another  name  to  add  to  these  is  William 
of  Southampton,  the  title  of  whose  manuscript  of  this  date 
(at  Lincoln  College,  Oxford)  presumably  refers  to  this 
quarrel:  Against  the  jealous  detractors  of  the  Preaching  Friars? 

1  Siger  de  Brabant,  pp.  102,  104;  Revue  des  Sciences  Philosophiques  et 
Theologiques  (1913),  pp.  46-70,  245-262.  Why  does  A.  G.  Little  make  the 
dispute  turn  on  the  question  as  to  whether  matter  was  the  principle  of 
individuation,  and  still  more  why  does  he  say,  "the  Church  rallied  to 
the  side  of  the  Franciscans"?  {Greyfriars,  p.  73). 

2  Annates,  p.  400.  3  Sigerde  Brabant,  p.  102. 


Ht©j:foti>  71 

The  controversy  soon  entered  on  a  further  stage.  On  the 
occasion  of  the  consecration  of  the  Bishop  of  Salisbury,  evi- 
dently after  the  fatigues  of  the  ceremony  were  over,  Arch- 
bishop Peckham  relaxed  himself  in  conversation  with  the 
Dominican  provincial,  William  of  Hotham.  This  last  (per- 
haps the  most  brilliant  friar  the  English  Province  ever  pro- 
duced, who  shared  with  S.  Thomas  alone  in  the  history  of 
that  mediaeval  university  the  honour  of  being  for  two  succes- 
sive terms  professor  at  Paris)  told  the  Archbishop  that  he  had 
had  a  letter  from  Oxford  that  morning  in  which  the  friars 
complained  that  Peckham  was  acting  harshly  to  them  out  of 
sheer  jealousy  of  their  Order.  The  Archbishop  at  once  pro- 
tested his  love  for  them,  which  even  surpassed  the  love  of  the 
provincial.  To  calm  the  Primate,  William  of  Hotham  admitted 
that  he,  too,  had  once  thought  S.  Thomas's  philosophy  at 
fault,  especially  over  the  question  of  the  plurality  of  forms. 
Peckham  replied  by  denying  any  wish  to  sow  enmity  between 
the  two  orders ;  he  had  never  asked  the  other  Franciscans 
what  they  thought,  but  had  acted  purely  on  his  own  delicate 
conscience.  What,  however,  he  objected  to,  was  the  arrogant 
claim  for  intellectual  supremacy  put  forward  by  the  Domini- 
cans. However,  Peckham  in  this  conversation  appears  to 
have  said  something  which  militated  against  himself,  for  he 
was  certainly  extremely  annoyed  by  the  provincial's  retailing 
it  later.  He  accused  Hotham  of  "uncovering  his  father's 
shame,"  but  the  secret  revelation  of  the  Archbishop's  private 
opinion,  whatever  it  was,  is  now  lost. 

Next  year  (1285)  the  Archbishop  was  more  angry  still.  In 
making  his  metropolitan  visitation  of  the  Lincoln  diocese  he  had 
passed  through  Oxford,  and  there  he  learnt  that  certain  philo- 
sophical opinions  condemned  by  his  predecessor,  the  Domini- 
can, Kilwardby,  had  again  become  fashionable  and  were 
being  taught  in  the  schools.  He  had  therefore  called  in  the 
Bishop  of  Lincoln,  and  had  preached  publicly  himself  to  the 
effect  that  no  one  was  to  defend  any  of  these  condemned 
propositions  till  the  Bishop  and  Masters  had  seen  it  to  be 
safe.  The  only  matter  that  he  directly  tilted  against  was  the 
unity  of  forms,  and  he  admitted  in  his  letter  to  the  Cardinals 
in  which  this  accusation  was  made,  that  this  theory  was  the 
opinion  of  "  Friar  Thomas  of  Aquino,  of  holy  memory,"  but 
he  held  himself  to  be  justified  in  attacking  it,  for  he  had  been 
told  by  witnesses  that  S.  Thomas  had  submitted  this  as  well 
as  his  every  other  teaching  to  the  Paris  University.  The 
Oxford  Dominicans  were  at  fault,  said  Peckham,  in  attribut- 
ing his  opposition  to  a  rivalry  of  Orders,  for  (as  he  cleverly 
retorted)  he  was  only  continuing  humbly  in  the  glorious  foot- 
steps  of  their  own   Kilwardby.     This  epistle l  ends  with    a 

1  Register  Epist.  Peckliam,  vol.  iii,  p.  842. 


72  Ufoe  Englisb  Dominicans 

masterly  phrase,  which  is  both  essentially  typical  of  the 
mediaeval  mind  and  attractive  to  the  modern  spirit:  "The 
Teaching  of  the  Preaching-  Friars,  which  rejects  and  despises 
the  writings  of  the  Saints,  is  of  imminent  peril  to  the  Church, 
for  it  links  up  faith  with  a  particular  human  philosophy."  The 
phrase  would  have  been  more  convincing-  had  their  lordships 
not  been  aware  that  it  was  precisely  the  older  school  which 
was  making  orthodoxy  depend  on  Platonism,  and  the  newer 
school  which  was  trying  to  make  room  also  for  Aristotle. 

Six  months  later  (i  June  1285)  the  Primate  defended  his 
attitude  in  this  debate  to  Bishop  Oliver  Sutton  of  Lincoln. 
He  singled  out  for  especial  condemnation  the  writing  of  Friar 
Richard  Claypole,  Master  Regent  of  the  Dominican  school  of 
Oxford.  This  pamphlet,  which  has  been  printed  under  the 
title  of  the  Correctariwn  Corrtiptorii,x  seems  to  be  little  more 
than  a  republication  of  Macclesfield's  book  with  an  appendix 
of  great  length,  that  was  altogether  original  and  dealt  exclu- 
sively with  the  question  of  the  plurality  of  forms.  Claypole 
had  evidently  at  one  time,  like  Hotham  himself,  and,  indeed, 
all  the  Dominican  professors  of  that  generation,  been  origin- 
ally an  upholder  of  the  older  system,  but  had  been  sincerely 
convinced  by  the  subtle  arguments  of  S.  Thomas:  "Behold 
before  God,  I  lie  not  when  I  say  that  did  I  know  of  arguments 
disproving  the  unity  of  forms  (as  I  once  believed)  I  would 
have  inserted  them  one  by  one."  To  Peckham  the  whole  con- 
troversy appeared  little  else  than  an  impertinence.  It  was  an 
attempt  of  the  young  to  dethrone  the  old,  the  vigorous  im- 
prudence of  inexperience  to  make  light  of  the  teaching  of 
tradition.  The  newer  school  has  existed,  he  asserts,  only 
"  twenty  years,"  and  cannot  therefore  be  taken  seriously  to 
rival  the  school  of  saints  and  doctors,  especially  the  Fran- 
ciscans, Alexander  of  Hales  and  S.  Bonaventure.  Whatever 
Augustine  laid  down  is  now  repudiated,  whether  in  science  or 
in  psychology,  hence  the  tractate  of  Claypole  is  violently 
assailed  by  the  Archbishop  in  language  that  is  hardly  archi- 
episcopal.  Claypole  himself  is  dismissed  as  a  garrulous  fellow 
who  knew  not  even  how  to  keep  silent,  and  his  book  is 
described  as  "  a  damned  page  and  a  cursed  folio."  Further, 
"its  beginning  is  headless,  its  middle  wicked,  its  ending 
folly,"  since  the  author  has  the  impertinence  to  argue  with 
him,  the  Archbishop,  as  with  an  equal.  Nay,  by  his  attack, 
Claypole  makes  the  Church  a  monster  by  putting  its  feet  (the 
priests)  above  its  head  (the  bishops).  This  horrible  metaphor 
is  evidently  put  in  to  work  on  the  imagination  of  his  corre- 
spondent, Bishop  Oliver  of  Lincoln;  but  the  good  prelate  did 
not  appear  to  be  much  frightened. 

But  Peckham  was  far  too  vigorous  and  far  too  sincere  in 

1   Corrector iu m  Corruptorii  fratis  Thoinae,  Naples,  1644  (p.  186). 


Ht  ©£fOtft  73 

his  opposition  to  Dominican  philosophy  to  rest  quiet  with 
merely  abusive  letters.  His  energy  was  astounding-  in  this 
as  in  everything-  he  took  up.  In  1286 1  he  summoned  a 
council  of  suffragan  bishops  at  the  Parliament  before  the 
King  went  overseas,  and  singled  out  for  condemnation  twelve 
propositions  from  Claypole's  book  as  contrary  to  the  orthodox 
faith :  of  these,  most  dealt  with  the  question  of  the  unity  of 
forms.  So  violently  was  the  Primate  persuaded  of  the  evil 
effects  of  the  newer  theories,  that  he  considered  himself 
obliged  to  condemn  a  proposition  as  heterodox,  thus  moder- 
ately worded :  ' '  Neither  opinion  in  itself  or  in  its  consequences 
seems  to  contain  heresy  or  anything  incongruous  or  opposed 
to  faith"  ;  another  was  actually  taken  almost  entirely  from 
the  Summa  of  S.  Thomas  and  is  by  now  the  traditional 
teaching  of  the  theological  schools.  Others  are  plainly  wrong, 
so  plainly  indeed,  that  it  is  clear  some  misunderstanding  must 
have  arisen  for  them  to  have  appeared  in  Claypole's  work. 
But  Peckham  was  not  allowed  to  have  all  his  own  way  even 
with  his  council,  for  Hotham,  who  was  still  provincial  and  a 
firm  favourite  of  the  King  and  of  the  bishops,  appeared,  and 
after  the  condemnation  had  been  pronounced  solemnly  in  the 
centre  of  the  Hall,  declared  the  incompetence  of  the  tribunal 
to  sit  in  judgement  on  a  preaching  friar,  refused  therefore 
to  consider  the  condemnation  valid,  and  appealed  to  the 
sole  doctrinal  authority  which  he  recognized,  the  Pope  in 
Rome.2 

It  is  curious  that  we  possess  a  letter  from  the  Archbishop 
of  York  (who  was  traditionally  the  opponent  of  Canterbury) 
written  to  Hotham  in  this  very  year,  promising  to  assist  the 
Dominicans  to  the  best  of  his  power,  but  not  specifying  in 
what  cause.  It  is  just  possible  that  he  saw  here  a  favourable 
opportunity  for  inconveniencing  his  brother  Primate  of  the 
south.3 

By  this  time  the  Oxford  quarrel  appears  to  have  aroused 
interest  beyond  the  seas.  The  Primate,  whose  influence  was 
considerable,  had  been  badly  worsted  by  the  Dominican 
provincial,  whose  appeal  to  the  Holy  See  actually  ended  the 
controversy,  for  by  Rome's  tolerance  the  point  in  philosophy 
was  settled,  and  freedom  for  the  Thomistic  system  secured. 
But,  though  Peckham  had  failed  in  his  endeavours  to  sup- 
press the  "new-fangled  theories  of  twenty  years,"  his  in- 
fluence against  the  Dominicans  might  quite  easily  have  caused 
them  considerable  annoyance.  The  presence  of  Hotham  as 
provincial  may  well  have  been  thought  to  prove  too  great  an 
irritant  and  to  make  the  employment  of  the  Primate's  influence 
against  them  more  sure.  Moreover,  the  provincial  had  served 
his  purpose  and  achieved  liberty  for  the  English  friars,  and 

1  Annales  de  Dunstaplia,  pp.  323-325.  2  Chron.   Wykes,  p.  306. 

;>  Raine,  Historical  Letters  and  Papers,  p.  86. 


74  'Ebe  EiiQltsfo  Dominicans 

was  no  longer  necessary.  So  to  smooth  matters  over,  the 
Master-General  in  1287  sent  him  to  teach  in  the  Dominican 
priory  at  Paris.  Hotham,  however,  did  not  go;  in  1288  the 
command  was  repeated.  But  just  here  interposed  a  force 
which  in  the  history  of  the  English  Province  continuously 
appears  in  the  same  dramatic  way  to  stay  the  hand  of  higher 
authority.  The  King  at  once  employed  him  on  business  of 
the  realm.  Edward  I  had  always  been  very  friendly  with  the 
Dominicans.  Over  his  fine,  impetuous  character,  Nicholas 
Trivet,  who,  as  a  friar,  had  known  him,  lingers  with  reverence 
and  delight.  Edward's  confessor  was  chosen  always  from 
the  preaching  friars.  Hotham  was  one  of  his  best-loved 
favourites.  He  was  a  favourite  also  with  the  Queen.  In  1280 
he  had,  in  thankfulness  for  much  munificence,  received  her  into 
fellowship  with  the  Order.  She  was  to  participate  in  all  the 
merit  of  spiritual  good  works  achieved  by  the  Order  over 
many  lands.  At  her  death  the  same  suffrages  of  the  whole 
Order  would  be  offered  for  her  as  for  a  deceased  Master- 
General,  and  as  an  earnest  of  this  she  would  receive  at  once 
from  every  English  Dominican  priest  the  offering  of  one  Mass 
and  from  every  other  English  Dominican,  cleric  or  lay 
brother,  the  suffrage  corresponding  to  a  Mass.  At  her  death 
Eleanor  named  Hotham  as  one  of  her  executors.  As  a  sign 
then  of  affection  Edward  despatched  Hotham  as  one  of  his 
ambassadors  to  Rome,  and  thus  by  this  subterfuge  (for  friars 
could  not  go  to  Rome  on  their  own  affairs  without  leave  from 
the  Master-General,  which  would  clearly  in  this  case,  on 
account  of  Hotham's  absence  from  Paris,  have  been  refused) 
gave  him  an  opportunity  to  present  his  case  'and  that  of 
his  Oxford  brethren  to  the  Pope.  Nicholas  IV  sent  him  back 
to  Edward  on  matters  connected  with  taxation  for  the 
Crusade;  and  in  1296  Boniface  VIII  made  him  Archbishop  of 
Dublin.1 

Poor  Claypole,  the  other  protagonist,  fared  not  so  well. 
His  life  was  made  utterly  miserable,  so  that  bearing  no 
longer  the  tumult  of  Oxford  and  the  opposition  still  to  be 
encountered  there  he  fled  over  sea  to  Rome.  Pope  Nicholas, 
a  Franciscan,  who  had  already  in  the  matter  of  the  govern- 
ment of  the  Tertiaries  quite  naturally  shown  a  strong  love  for 
his  own  Order  and  jealousy  of  the  Dominicans,  was  not  likely 
to  be  sympathetic  to  so  fierce  and  headstrong  and  violent  an 
opponent  of  his  own  school  of  philosophy,  and  immediately 
imposed  silence  on  him.  But  this  Claypole  could  not  observe. 
Peckham  had  already  described  him  as  garrulous  and  unable 
to  be  quiet.  It  was  perhaps  temperament,  perhaps  the  result  of 
his  training.  Anyway  at  Bologna  he  broke  out  into  lecturing, 
became  demented,  and  in  much   melancholy  at  his  unhappy 

1  Archaeological  Journal,  1878,  pp.  S-11.  P.R.O.,  Liber  B.  Thes.  Cur. 
Recept.  Scac,  fol.  i7b. 


at  ©£forfc  75 

lot,  died  of  starvation — evidently  a  self-imposed  death. 
"He  ended  his  life  with  much  suffering-,"  say  the  Annals 
of  Dunstable.  This  was  in  1288,  just  ten  years  after  the  fray 
had  begun.1 

Despite  this  sad  close  to  Claypole's  career,  the  Dominicans 
triumphed.  Aristotle  conquered  at  Oxford  as  he  had  con- 
quered at  Paris,  conquered  so  overwhelmingly  that  he  came 
in  the  end  to  occupy  the  same  place  of  conventional  orthodox 
philosophy  from  which  he  had  with  such  quarrelling  and  dis- 
tress ousted  his  master,  Plato.  Bishops  and  archbishops 
clinging  to  old  forms  and  narrow  views  might  condemn ; 
Roger  Bacon,  whose  energy  was  spent,  says  Albert  the 
Great,  in  criticism,2  and  who  on  his  own  admission  did  little 
enough  constructive  work  himself,  might  point  his  bitter 
words ;  the  universities  with  their  venerable  and  oppressive 
weight  of  learning  might  solidly  forbid;  but  these  things 
could  not  limit  the  quickening  influence  of  the  new  scientific 
movement.  "Condemnations  can't  swim  the  channel,"  said 
one  English  Dominican  to  William  of  Ockham  not  many  years 
after;3  "The  Popes  are  the  only  judges  of  doctrine,"*  said 
another.  So  while  Claypole  goes  down  to  his  end,  blind, 
mad,  melancholy,  the  two  other  protagonists  of  the  cause  are 
advanced  to  high  places  in  the  Church — Macclesfield  becomes 
a  cardinal  and  Hotham  (whom  a  chronicler  describes  as 
"amusing,  popular,  pious,  and  a  favourite  of  the  King") 
reaches  to  the  primatial  See  of  the  City  of  Dublin. 

St.  Thomas  had  ended  his  treatise  on  the  unity  of  the  in- 
tellect with  a  famous  outburst  of  intense  vigour:  "  If  any  one, 
taking  glory  in  the  false  name  of  science,  wishes  to  say  any- 
thing against  our  writings,  let  him  not  skulk  in  corners  or 
talk  to  boys  who  have  no  knowledge  of  the  causes  of  things ; 
but  let  him  write  against  our  writings,  if  he  dare,  and  he  shall 
find  not  only  me,  who  am  the  least  of  the  band,  but  many 
other  followers  of  Truth  by  whom  his  error  shall  be  resisted 
and  his  ignorance  set  right."0  This  challenge  to  Averroist 
and  to  Platonist  had  been  followed  by  fierce  and  open  attack. 
Paris  and  Oxford  had  been  the  two  chief  battle-grounds. 
Thenceforward  in  the  West,  till  the  neo-Platonists  of  the 
Renaissance,  the  opposition  was  hushed  into  silence.  The 
art  schools  of  Paris  and  the  friars  there  and  in  Oxford, 
against  influence  and  tradition  and  inertia,  alone  and  unaided 
had  won. 

Yet  on  the  conclusion  of  this  dispute,  another  which  in- 
timately concerned  the  Oxford  Dominicans  immediately 
ensued.    It  was  not  scholastic  like   the  last,  but  academic, 

1  Annates,  p.  341.  2  In  Polit.,  last  passage. 

3  Dialogus  (Lyons,  1495),  dist.  1,  bk.  ii,  cap.  xxiv,  fol.  14. 

4  Trivet,  Annates,  p.  364. 

5  De  Unitate  Inteltectus,  ad  finem. 


76  XTbe  JBtiQlisb  Dominicans 

relating-  purely  to  the  giving-  of  degrees.1  The  friars  them- 
selves considered  it  to  be  the  result  of  their  earlier  quarrel 
which  had  ruffled  the  feelings  of  the  University  and  had  in- 
spired its  officials  with  jealousy;  the  University  authorities 
strenuously  denied  any  such  base  motive  for  their  action, 
asserting  simply  that  they  were  compelled  to  it  by  the  oaths 
which  they  had  sworn,  to  uphold  the  privileges  of  their  Alma 
Mater.  Still  it  is  evident  that  the  theological  controversy  had 
certainly  helped  to  disturb  and  excite  the  atmosphere. 

All  during  the  thirteenth  century  the  friars  had  unquestion- 
ably been  responsible  for  the  improvement  in  the  studies  and 
general  tone  of  the  universities  of  Europe.  They  had  sent 
there  their  best  students  and  professors,  had  suggested  by 
their  own  conventual  buildings  the  establishment  of  the 
Oxford  colleges,  and  had  proved  themselves  the  allies  and  even 
the  patrons  of  the  professors  and  students.  But  as  the 
universities  advanced  in  strength  they  outgrew  their  need  for 
the  fostering  care  of  the  friars,  and  apparently  the  friars 
endeavoured  to  retain  by  custom  what  they  had  won  by  merit. 
The  position  they  had  held  was  gradually,  under  the  en- 
lightened competition  of  Walter  de  Merton  and  his  peers, 
being  levelled  up  to  by  the  rest  of  the  University,  and  they 
who  had  first  been  attacked  for  their  modern  and  freshly  con- 
ceived methods  of  teaching  were  now  desperately  engaged  in 
defending  themselves  on  the  principle  that  their  position  was 
guaranteed  them  by  tradition. 

The  first  record  of  the  quarrel  occurs  in  a  letter  of  King 
Edward  II  to  the  Chancellor  and  Masters  of  the  University 
of  Oxford,  asking  them  to  allow  the  Dominicans  there  study- 
ing their  wonted  rights  and  customs  within  their  own  bound- 
aries. There  is  no  definite  reference  in  the  document  to  prove 
what  these  rights  and  customs  were,  nor  any  allusion  to  the 
way  in  which  they  had  been  encroached  upon.  But  already 
we  learn  this  matter  must  have  been  in  debate  and  of  much 
importance,  for  the  Masters  had  come  up  from  Oxford  to 
London,  and  had  been  in  consultation  over  it.  This  the  King, 
who  all  the  way  through  appeared  as  the  strenuous  defender 
of  the  friars,  declared  to  be  wholly  unnecessary  and  mis- 
chievous. The  letter  is  dated  9  December  1311.  The  Do- 
minicans, in  their  petition  to  Rome,  more  fully  explained  their 
difficulties:  they  allege  that  they  were  caught  between  two 
authorities.  On  the  one  hand  the  Order  would  not  let  them 
study  arts  till  they  had  graduated  in  theology,  on  the  other 
the  University  by  refusing  to  allow  any  but  graduates  in 
theology  to  lecture  on  the  Bible,  and  by  making  arts  a  pre- 
liminary to  theology,  prevented  any  Dominican  from  taking 

1  For  these  documents  consult  Little,  Greyfriars  of  Oxford,  p.  39,  etc. ; 
Rashdall,  The  Friars  Preachers  and  the  University  (Historical  Society  of 
Oxford,  Collectanea,  vol.  ii,  pp.  217-273). 


Ht  ©jforfc  77 

his  degree  (except  by  a  special  dispensation  which  had  to  be 
secured  by  a  unanimous  vote  of  the  Regent-Masters  of  all  the 
faculties).  By  this  arrangement,  therefore,  the  friars  were  at 
the  mercy  of  any  single  master-of-arts  who  chose  to  vote 
non-placet.  Again,  they  were  forbidden  by  the  Oxford  statutes 
to  lecture  in  Scripture  until  they  had  first  lectured  on  the 
Sentences  (the  official  text-book  of  theology).  This  appeared 
an  absurd  arrangement  to  the  friars  who,  throughout  the 
Middle  Ages,  were  perpetually  insisting  on  the  value  of 
Scripture  as  a  study  by  itself,  not  simply  to  be  supposed  to 
be  a  mere  department  of  theology.  A  less  noble  cause  of 
complaint  was  that  whereas  "of  old"  the  defensions  had 
always  (note  the  appeal  to  tradition)  taken  place  at  the  Do- 
minican church,  they  were  now  held  at  S.  Mary's,  the 
University  church.  Finally  they  protested  that  statutes  were 
carried  and  considered  binding  once  they  had  obtained  the 
votes  of  a  majority  of  masters  in  any  two  faculties,  and,  in 
consequence,  that  in  spite  of  the  unanimous  opposition  of  the 
theological  faculty  or  of  the  legal  faculty,  whether  civil  or 
canonical  (in  which  two  alone  they  could  pretend  to  any  real 
influence  or  voting  strength),  laws  might  be  made  which  were 
certainly  invalid. 

All  these  subjects  of  complaint,  together  with  definite  acts 
of  hostility  to  certain  Friar-Bachelors  and  Doctors,  were 
drawn  up  in  form  and  published  in  the  Franciscan  church  at 
Oxford  during  sermon  time.  A  copy  of  them  was  served  on 
the  Proctors  of  the  University.  But  Canon  Law  required  over 
and  above  this  a  notarial  certificate  that  the  appeal  from  the 
University  to  a  higher  tribunal  had  been  served  on  the  Oxford 
Chancellor  himself,  Henry  de  Manefield.  For  this  purpose,  on 
26  February  131 2,  Friar  Lawrence  of  Warwick,  a  lively  and 
venturous  Dominican,  endeavoured  to  break  in  on  the  Chan- 
cellor during  his  public  lecture,  but  he  found  his  way  barred 
by  servants  and  others  "thereunto  deputed."  Repulsed,  he 
patiently  waited  at  the  door  till  the  good  doctor  had  finished 
his  discourse.  As  Henry  de  Manefield  emerged,  Friar  Law- 
rence rushed  at  him  and  thrust  the  notice  of  appeal  into  the 
ample  folds  of  the  Master's  gown.  But  the  Chancellor,  swear- 
ing heartily  {cum  verbis  infractivis,  which  may  be  translated 
in  a  phrase  of  Richard  Rolle  as  "  unbuxomnesse  of  worde"), 
threw  the  paper  on  the  ground. 

A  month  later  the  King  again  wrote  to  the  Masters  and 
Chancellor  of  the  University,  not  alluding  to  the  quarrel 
directly,  but  merely  asking  as  a  personal  petition  that  they 
should  allow  Roger  of  Baketon,  a  Dominican  from  York  who 
had  already  been  accepted  by  the  University,  to  proceed  to 
his  degree  according  to  the  privileges  given  "  in  old  time  "  to 
the  preaching  friars.  The  next  day  a  new  idea  struck  the 
King,  and  he  wrote  to  suggest  a  truce  between  the  University 


78  XTbe  Englisb  Dominicans 

and  the  Dominicans  until  Parliament  should  meet,  and  that 
in  the  meantime  it  would  be  as  well  that  these  last  should 
continue  to  use  such  customs  and  rights  as  they  had  anciently 
possessed.  But  this  could  not  have  been  meant  as  in  any  sense 
an  attempt  to  compromise  with  the  University,  for  Edward  II 
continued  in  his  own  absolutist  spirit  to  insist  that  every 
privilege  at  Oxford  enjoyed  by  Masters  and  students  and 
Chancellor,  depended  entirely  on  the  royal  charter  granted  by 
his  predecessors  and  confirmed  by  himself.  If,  then,  argued 
the  King,  the  freedom  of  the  University  depended  entirely  on 
him,  by  what  right  was  that  freedom  denied  to  and  prejudiced 
against  the  Dominicans?  But  to  secure  powerful  support  for 
his  beloved  friars,  the  King  wrote  also  to  Pope  Clement  V  in 
much  the  same  spirit. 

On  the  other  hand  the  University  was  not  silent.  Through 
the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  its  ecclesiastical  superior,  it 
consulted  with  Paris  over  the  matter  and  demanded  from 
that  venerable  assembly  a  copy  of  its  privileges  for  there, 
too,  only  earlier,  the  Dominicans  had  come  into  collision  with 
the  University.  To  the  King  they  sent  an  answer  in  general 
terms,  asking  that  he  would  deign  most  graciously  to  hear 
their  side  of  the  matter.  They  pleaded  their  great  poverty 
and  the  ruinous  expense  that  would  befall  them  if  the  discus- 
sion were  to  be  argued  in  Rome.  To  every  complaint  of  the 
friars  they  were  perfectly  willing  to  make  answer.  They 
entirely  denied  the  supposed  antiquity  of  the  statute  which 
fixed  the  Dominican  church  as  the  official  scene  for  all  dis- 
putations, for  hardly  to  any  considerable  extent  "had  that 
custom  been  in  man's  memory,  and  even  during  that  time  the 
discussions  were  often  held  in  other  schools.  Moreover,  it 
was  because  the  University  had  outgrown  the  size  of  its  halls 
that  S.  Mary's  was  now  taken  over  as  the  only  place  for  such 
academic  meetings.  As  for  the  Biblical  professors  having  first 
of  all  to  pass  their  theological  degrees,  that  was  a  necessity 
forced  on  the  University  by  the  errors  taught  in  Scripture  by 
many  unqualified  lecturers  who  were  ignorant  of  theology. 
They  had  no  guarantee  that  orthodox  views  on  the  Bible 
would  be  expressed,  unless  the  theological  course  preceded 
the  scriptural.  Moreover,  the  whole  of  these  statutes  were 
already  ancient  history,  and  the  friars  ought  to  have  pro- 
tested against  their  enactment  long  ago.  The  time  had  slipped 
by  and  it  was  now  too  late  to  appeal. 

The  answer  of  the  friars,  rebutting  all  the  arguments,  went 
chiefly  into  the  increasing  vexations  caused  them  by  the  other 
schools.  Threats  of  personal  violence  had  driven  away  their 
scholars,  their  public  defensions  were  boycotted,  their  con- 
ciliatory offers  through  King,  Queen,  and  nobles  had  been 
vain,  they  had  been  excommunicated  by  the  Archbishop  at 
the  prompting  of  the  Chancellor.    To  this  they  added  that 


at  ©jforfc  79 

there  was  an  obvious  advantage  in  having-  the  Dominican 
priory  as  the  scene  of  academic  disputations,  since  the  peace 
and  quiet  of  their  river-island  contrasted  favourably  with  the 
rush  and  rattle  of  the  High  Street. 

This  list  of  gravamina,  drawn  up  with  elaborate  order,  had 
by  Canon  Law  to  be  served  on  the  whole  body  of  the  Masters, 
and  this  distasteful  and  even  dangerous  task  was  deputed  by 
the  friars  to  their  Proctor,  Lawrence  of  Warwick,  who  had 
so  successfully  cornered  the  Chancellor  himself  earlier  in  the 
year.  On  30  November,  therefore,  in  131 2,  while  convocation 
was  being  held  in  the  church  of  S.  Mary's,  Friar  Lawrence 
advanced  into  the  assembly  and  began  as  swiftly  as  he  could 
to  read  through  this  list  of  grievances.  Swift  as  he  was,  the 
Masters  were  swifter.  Despite  his  "loud,  disturbing  pro- 
tests," he  was  hustled  out  of  the  sacred  building  and  the 
great  door  was  heavily  barred  against  his  entrance.  This  last 
precaution  was  their  undoing.  Yet  had  Canon  Law  to  be 
obeyed,  so  creeping  round  to  the  south  side  and  climbing  first 
upon  a  tombstone  and  then  on  to  the  shoulders  of  another 
Dominican,  the  undaunted  Lawrence  bawled  his  gravamina 
in  stately  Latin,  but  at  an  express  rate  through  the  window. 
Speedily  he  dismounted  from  his  human  pulpit,  nailed  the 
document  to  the  porch,  and  fled  before  the  volley  of  bad 
language  and  violence  which  drove  him  to  the,cloistered  peace 
of  his  convent  home.  The  locked  door  of  S.  Mary's  had 
saved  him.  The  Masters  could  not  get  out  in  time  to  frus- 
trate him. 

To  Rome  then  the  case  was  carried  by  both  sides.  Even 
the  King-  was  once  more  brought  into  the  dispute,  for  on 
1  February  in  131 3  he  wrote  to  the  Pope  protesting  that  the 
Proctor  of  the  University  had  misreported  him.  He  declared 
that  he  had  never  annulled  the  privileges  of  the  Masters  and 
Chancellor,  which  was  evidently  a  papal  prerogative ;  his  real 
phrase  has  already  been  quoted,  wherein  he  merely  queried  by 
what  right  they,  whose  freedom  had  been  granted  by  royal 
charter,  denied  that  freedom  to  the  friars,  who  were  equally 
with  them  the  recipients  of  the  bounty  of  the  crown.  From 
this  date  till  November  negotiations  were  continued  by  the 
two  contending  parties,  and  attempts  were  made  to  settle  by 
amicable  arrangement  this  dreary  quarrel.  At  last,  on  the 
5th  of  that  month,  a  composition  for  arbitration  was  drawn 
up.  The  Proctors  for  the  Friars  Preachers  were  Luke  of 
Woodford,  who  was  a  very  distinguished  man,  later  to  be 
royal  confessor  to  Edward  III,  and  Ralph  of  Seton ;  the 
Proctors  of  the  University  were  Edward  Melpham  and 
Anthony  Bek,  who  was  to  figure  later  prominently  in  English 
political  history.  These  four  appointed  four  others,  who  were 
themselves  to  decide  the  whole  matter,  viz.,  the  Bishop  of 
Llandaff  (or  if  he  could  not  attend,  Master  Robert  of  Clotnall, 


80  Qhe  Bnalisb  Bominicans 

Canon  of  S.  Paul's),  Canon  Gilbert  Middleton  (or  Master 
Adam  of  Orleton),  and  two  Dominicans,  Thomas  Everard  (or 
John  of  Wrotham),  and  Peter  of  Kennington  (or  Luke  of 
Woodford).  The  points  to  be  settled  were  also  definitely 
stated  and  limited,  and  comprised  the  eight  causes  of  the 
dispute,  viz. : 

(i)  The  place  for  the  sermons  and  examinations  of  bachelors 

of  theology,  both  secular  and  regular, 
(ii)  The  fact  that  the  Vesperae  or  disputations  in  S.  Mary's 
could  be  suspended  on  veto  of  the  professors. 

(iii)  That  no  one  could  take  a  degree  in  Scripture  till  first 
graduated  in  theology,  nor  in  theology  till  first  gradu- 
ated in  arts,  except  by  special  dispensation  which  had 
actually  been  refused  to  a  certain  friar. 

(iv)  The  ruling  whereby  whatever  the  regent-masters  in 
both  faculties  and  the  major  part  of  non-regents  agree 
to,  became  law. 

(v)  The  fact  that  none  could  be  received  as  masters  or 
bachelors  in  any  faculty  until  they  had  sworn  to  observe 
all  these  rules  and  statutes. 

(vi)  That  every  master  and  bachelor  before  receiving  his 
degree  had  to  reply  to  the  objectors  appointed  by  the 
University, 
(vii)  The  expulsion  of  Friar  Hugh  of  Sutton  from  the  con- 
gregation of  masters,  when  the  Bedells  never  (as  they 
should  have  done)  rendered  him  any  support  or  aid. 
(viii)  The  non-admission  of  Friar  Roger  of  Baketon  to  the 
mastership  and  of  Friar  Richard  of  Huntly  and  of  other 
friars  to  read  the  Sentences. 

In  token  of  their  earnestness  and  as  a  fine  against  non- 
appearance both  sides  deposited  money  with  the  Augustinian 
prior  and  convent  of  S.  Frideswide. 

The  four  arbitrators  chosen  all  met  in  person,  the  Bishop, 
the  Canon,  and  the  two  Friars,  and  gradually  in  London  drew 
up  a  document  which  was  intended  to  give  satisfaction  all 
round.    It  consisted  of  seven  chief  headings: 

(i)  In  future  the  Dominicans  could  hold  their  disputations 
in  their  own  priory,  but  the  rest  should  go  to  S.  Mary's, 
(ii)  The  sermons  and  examinations  of  bachelors  used  to  be 
held  in  the  Dominican  and  Franciscan  churches,  but  for 
the  last  twelve  years  had  been  transferred  to  S.  Mary's. 
This  was  to  stand,  but  in  future  each  bachelor,  before 
lecturing  in  the  Sentences,  was  in  the  Dominican  church 
to  preach  one  sermon  before  the  masters  of  the  faculty 
of  theology  on  a  Sunday  assigned  by  the  University, 
(iii)  The  statute  whereby  no  one  was  to  profess  Scripture 
until  after  first  taking  a  degree  as  bachelor  in  theology 
was  to  remain. 


TOMB  OF  EDWARD  II   IX   GLOUCESTER  CATHEDRAL 
Photograph  by  Sydney  A.  Pitcher 


[To  face  p.  80 


Ht  ©£fort>  s  i 

(iv)  Also  the  statute  was  to  continue  whereby  none  could 
lecture  on  theology  till  after  first  graduating-  in  arts 
except  by  a  unanimous  vote  of  the  masters  of  the  theo- 
logical faculty. 

(v)  Yet  no  master  was  to  veto  such  a  dispensation  out  of 
malice,  and  his  reason  for  objecting  might  be  chal- 
lenged within  ten  days  and  discussed  by  the  whole  uni- 
versity. 

(vi)  No  new  statutes  were  to  be  passed  without  first  being 
put  in  writing  and  read  to  all  the  masters,  and  ten 
copies  were  to  be  distributed  to  each  faculty  for  dis- 
cussion. Then  after  an  interval  of  fifteen  days  the  sug- 
gested statute  must  have  been  confirmed  by  a  majority 
of  any  three  faculties  of  which  arts  must  be  one.   • 

(vii)  The  Dominicans  were  to  retain  their  own  free  schools 

in  their  priory,  which  were  to  be  counted  part  of  the 

University,  so  that  for  lectures,  disputations,  and  dis- 

-  cussions,  these  satisfied  as  legitimate  Oxford  academic 

functions. 

The  year  following,  Edward  II  solemnly  confirmed  both  the 
composition  and  the  resulting  arbitration.  But  even  this  does 
not  seem  wholly  to  have  healed  over  the  dispute.  Letters 
still  went  backwards  and  forwards  between  Rome  and  Canter- 
bury and  Oxford  and  Westminster,  which  revealed  a  good 
deal  of  bickering  between  all  the  parties  concerned,  yet  with 
this  difference  that  the  Primate,  who  previously  had  excom- 
municated the  friars,  appears  later  to  have  begun  to  favour 
their  side,  and  to  have  defended  them  in  the  Papal  Courts. 

The  University  itself  was  evidently  conscious  of  this  change 
of  front,  and  endeavoured  to  win  back  the  Archbishop  by 
letters  which  are  Oriental  in  their  deference  and  redundant  of 
piled-up  epithets.  He  is  their  "  Father  of  Fathers,"  their 
"Mountain  of  Mountains,"  the  condescension  of  his  "  Im- 
mensity" is  both  "astonishing  and  delicious."  Simul- 
taneously with  all  this,  they  were  busy  imprisoning  the  friars 
whom  they  found  obstreperous  and  objectionable,  so  that 
royal  writs  had  to  be  issued  declaring  the  friars  exempt  from 
the  criminal  jurisdiction  of  the  courts  and  subject  only  to  their 
own  discipline  and  authority.  Their  own  prisons  and  not 
"  Bocardo  "  were  the  places  in  which  recalcitrant  Dominicans 
could  lawfully  be  housed.  By  1320  peace  had  definitely  come. 
Both  masters  and  friars  had  accepted  the  award  and  dealt 
fairly  by  it.  It  was  really  as  just  a  settlement  as  could  have 
been  devised,  though  the  personal  cases  which  were  entered 
into  and  specified  in  the  official  list  of  gravamina  are  not 
referred  to,  and  were  perhaps  settled  without  reference  to  the 
board  of  arbitrators. 

During  the  whole  reign  of  Edward  III  both  sides  worked 

G 


82  TLbc  Bnglisb  Dominicans 

together  and  little  or  no  friction  is  to  be  observed  in  the 
official  records.  At  least  no  complaints  are  to  be  found  by 
either  side. 

Under  Richard  II  (like  Edward  II  in  so  many  ways)  the 
quarrel  was  re-opened.  Both  these  young  monarchs,  whose 
reigns  were  singularly  unfortunate,  were  devoted  patrons  of 
the  Order  of  S.  Dominic.  Edward  II  expressly  declares  his 
personal  love  for  the  saint,  and  Richard  II  was  bound  by 
closer  ties  than  that  to  the  Order.  Under  both,  therefore,  the 
Dominicans  seemed  more  likely  to  secure  proper  treatment; 
so  that  it  may  well  have  been  that  the  nuisance  complained 
of  earlier  by  the  friars  really  continued  throughout  the  whole 
reign  of  Edward  III,  but  realizing  their  little  prospect  of 
success  against  the  strong  influence  of  the  University  at  the 
court  of  one  so  "  neutral"  as  that  king,  they  may  well  have 
preferred  to  put  off  till  his  successor's  reign  any  complaints 
they  desired  to  make.  Certainly  it  is  curious  that  from  1320 
to  1378  no  documents  at  present  show  traces  of  any  trouble ; 
nor  before  1310  nor  after  1388  are  there  any  real  references  to 
this  dispute.  The  quarrel,  therefore,  is  absolutely  contained 
by  the  reigns  of  Edward  II  and  Richard  II. 

The  record  of  the  friars  at  Oxford  was  yet,  on  the  whole, 
peaceable.  The  two  disputes  which  threatened  to  produce 
estrangement  between  the  friars  and  the  University  were  of 
vital  importance  to  both,  and  certainly  had  beneficial  results 
by  reaction  upon  the  Order.  At  no  other  time  had  it  so  strong 
a  force  of  writers  and  professors  as  during  those  years  of 
struggle.  Put  on  its  mettle  by  the  very  strength  of  its  op- 
ponents, the  Order  was  compelled  to  use  to  the  best  possible 
advantage  its  organization  of  study.  When  these  disputes 
were  ended,  and  the  Wyclifnte  controversy  had  died  down,  the 
Dominicans  in  Oxford  and  all  the  country  over  began  visibly 
to  fail.  When  the  Observance  of  the  Province  is  studied,  the 
same  law  holds  good.  The  Order  of  Friars  Preachers  seems 
to  require  some  external  environment  of  contradiction  to 
bring  it  to  its  full  force.  It  began  in  a  country  in  which  the 
lapsed  far  outnumbered  in  intelligence  the  faithful  band  of 
eager  Catholics,  and  with  its  keen  appreciation  of  the  value 
of  mental  gifts  it  was  alive  to  the  necessity  of  preaching 
truth,  expounding  with  decision  the  articles  of  the  Faith.  But 
when  the  external  stimulus  of  debate  had  been  withdrawn, 
its  danger  was  a  placid  acquiescence  in  contentment,  and  its 
energies  have  been  too  often,  in  such  circumstances,  expended 
upon  needless,  frivolous,  and  futile  disputations.  As  one  of 
its  most  brilliant  members  noted  among  his  contemporary 
friars  at  the  Reformation,  they  were  wholly  unable  to  tilt 
with  effect  against  the  champions  of  the  new  religion.  They 
had  fenced,  in  his  words,  so  often  with  mere  reeds,  which 
were  always  fragile  and   sometimes  fanciful,  that  they  had 


Ht  ©jforfc  83 

lost  touch  with  real  warfare  and  real  argument.  For  so  long 
they  had  defended  positions,  the  holding  or  loss  of  which  was 
completely  immaterial  to  them,  that  the  sense  of  reality  had 
become  wholly  atrophied.  Bishop  Melchior  Canus,  O.P.  ,T  has 
given  a  terrible  indictment  of  the  intellectual  puerilities  of 
scholasticism  as  he  knew  it  in  the  sixteenth  century,  and  is 
completely  supported  by  such  evidence  as  we  have  of  the 
state  of  Dominican  studies  at  Oxford  during  the  later  three- 
quarters  of  the  fifteenth  century.  Even  in  comparison  with 
other  Orders  their  numbers  considerably  declined.  In  a  list 
of  graduates  at  Oxford  about  1450,  after  the  Benedictines 
(who  had  two  colleges  in  Oxford,  one  a  centre  for  their 
northern  abbeys  called  Durham  Hall,  now  Trinity  College, 
the  other  for  their  southern  abbeys,  called  Gloucester  Hall, 
now  Worcester  College)  they  came  first,  outnumbering  in 
their  graduates  the  Cistercians,  Carmelites,  Franciscans,  and 
Augustinians ;  by  1535  the  Cistercians  and  Franciscans  had 
outpaced  them  while  the  Black  Monks  kept  their  first  place 
by  a  substantial  and  overwhelming  majority. 

Then  broke  over  the  country  the  huge  destruction  which, 
with  deep  lack  of  humour,  men  call  the  Reformation.  Its  track, 
once  supposed  to  be  noticeable  by  its  fruitful  crop  of  grammar 
schools,  is  now  discovered  to  have  left  an  educational  waste. 
Even  the  men  of  the  new  religion  lamented  the  increasing 
ignorance  which  their  efforts  at  reform  actually  produced. 
The  dwindling  school  of  the  Dominicans  was  wholly  and  en- 
tirely suppressed.  Desertion,  fear,  flight,  reduced  the  com- 
munity to  fifteen.  Cromwell's  trusty  lieutenant,  Dr.  John 
London,  thus  describes  the  priory:2  "The  Black  Fryers  hathe 
in  their  baksyde  lykewise  dyvers  Ilonds  well  wodded  and 
conteynyth  in  lengith  a  great  ground.  There  querwasse  lately 
new  byldede  and  couerd  with  ledde.  It  is  lykewise  a  bigge 
Howse,  and  all  couered  with  slatt  saving  the  queere.  They 
have  prety  stor  of  plat  and  juellys  and  specially  there  ys  a 
gudd  chalis  of  golde  sett  with  stonys  and  ys  better  than  a  C. 
marks  :  and  ther  ys  also  a  gudd  crosse  with  other  things  con- 
teynyd  in  the  bill.  Ther  ornaments  be  olde  and  of  small  valor. 
They  have  a  fayer  Cundytt  and  ronnythe  fresshelye.  Ther  be 
butt  x  Fryers,  being  prests,  besid  the  Anker  which  is  a  well 
disposyd  man  and  have  L.  marks  yerly  of  the  Kings  cofers." 
These  spoils,  poor  as  they  sound — chalices,  crosses,  paxes, 
censers,  and  even  a  "  litill  pyxe  on  the  awlt'  wherin  the 
sacrament  ys  conteynde  " — were  sent  up  to  London  and  added 
to  the  rest  of  the  plunder  that  enriched  the  Crown  and  nobility 
at  the  expense  of  the  friars.     The  few  that  remained  agreed 

1  De  Locis  Theologicis.  The  whole  of  Book  VII  should  be  read  as  an 
intelligent  summary  of  the  scholastic  period,  made  by  one  who  had  plenty 
.-of  opportunity  for  judging-  its  strength  and  weakness. 

2  Reliquary,  1883,  April,  p.  215. 


84  Ube  Englisb  Dominicans 

readily  to  throw  off  their  habits  and  become  merged  in  the 
secular  clergy :  no  doubt  the  visitators  saw  to  it  that  excel- 
lent and  convincing  arguments  were  adduced  for  this  change 
of  life.  Among  others  was  the  hopeless  despoiling  of  the 
building  itself:  "  Then  I  defacyd  the  Churche  windoes,"  says 
London  of  his  visit  to  the  Dominican  priory  at  Warwick, 
"  and  thesellys  of  the  dorter,  as  I  dydd  in  every  place,  saving 
in  Bedford  and  Aylisbury,  wher  were  few  byers.  I  pullyd 
down  no  House  thoroughly  at  noon  of  the  Fryers;  but  so 
defaced  them  as  they  shuld  nott  lyghtly  be  made  Fryerys 
agen."  Is  it  to  be  wondered  at  that,  cast  out  upon  the  world 
to  which  they  were  unaccustomed,  and  finding  their  retreat 
cut  off  by  the  deliberate  destruction  of  their  priory,  the  last 
remnants  of  Oxford  Dominican  greatness  were  glad  to  secure 
the  peace  of  some  country  living?  The  names  of  that  last 
band  are  as  follows : 

Frat'  Will'm'  Wat'man  bac.  theologie 

Frat'  Thomas  Borell 

Frat'  Petrus  Fletcher 

Fr.  Richard  Prikilbank 

Fr.  Hugo  Cordewey 

Fr.  Jacobus  Noreys 

Fr.  Guydo  Wolsch 

Fr.  Will'm'  Glanson 

Fr.  Henric'  Mathew 

Fr.  Edwardus  Bampton 

Fr.  Will'm's  Dingle — anachoreta 

r-r"   tt       •  >  t>       i.   r   no'  infra  sacros 
Fr.  Henric    Benet  J 

Fr.  Joh'es  low  sub-diacon'. 

Under  Queen  Mary  something  was  done  to  re-establish  the 
Dominican  schools.  Two  Spanish  friars,  Soto  and  Villagarcia, 
were  brought  there  to  lecture,  though  there  seems  to  be  no 
record  of  any  attempt  to  start  a  Dominican  priory.  But  the 
speedy  death  of  the  Queen  quenched  all  such  efforts  to  restore 
any  of  the  old  Orders.  Elizabeth's  possession  of  power  ended 
all  such  hopes.  The  Blackfriars  was  pulled  down,  and  the 
stones  lay  disordered  over  the  river  island  where  they  had 
dwelt.  Forty  years  and  the  very  name  had  been  forgotten,  for 
in  Agas's  famous  map  of  Oxford  in  1578  the  site  is  marked 
"  Graie  Friers."  Part  of  these  ruins  were  used  by  Sir  Thomas 
Pope  in  building  the  garden  walls  of  his  restored  college  of 
Trinity,  but  of  tracery  and  mullion  and  carving  no  evidence 
remains.  The  civil  war  between  Charles  and  Parliament  meant 
further  destruction,  for  sieges  even  in  those  days  entailed 
trench  digging,  and  the  remains  of  the  building  were  dragged 
further  off  to  form  a  defence.  Just  one  small  portion  of  the 
priory,  popularly  known  as  the  Prior's  House  (but  more  prob- 


Ht  ©jrtorfc)  85 

ably  a  fragment  of  the  Guest  House  if  it  is  really  earlier  than 
Elizabeth's  reign),  remains  above  ground.  Over  the  whole 
was  later  a  market  garden,  from  which  time  no  doubt  date 
the  wild  Madonna  lilies  that  now,  as  prolific  as  weeds,  cover 
with  beauty  and  fragrance  and  clustering  mass  the  site  of  the 
friars'  home.  Cottages  and  streets  have  now  been  erected 
over  it,  and  the  island  is  an  island  no  longer,  though  local 
stories  abound  of  the  rush  of  water  heard  from  beneath  the 
floors  of  houses  when  rains  break  over  the  city.  Even  more 
circumstantial  are  the  skeletons  found,  the  burial  chalices, 
gold  rings,  and  other  signs  of  the  earlier  dwellers  that  from 
time  to  time  are  met  with.  These  dead  things  are  all  that 
remain  of  that  band  of  friars  who,  by  their  learning,  helped 
more  than  any  others  to  make  Oxford  in  the  thirteenth  cen- 
tury the  rival  of  Paris. 

It  is  true  that  the  friars  themselves  had  not  kept  up  to  their 
own  high  standard,  had  declined  in  learning  and  influence. 
That  is,  indeed,  the  deeper  pathos  of  their  story.  It  is  not  the 
ancient  bigotry  of  ignorant  fanaticism,  destructive  and  swag- 
gering in  the  garb  of  religion,  which  moves  to  any  depth  of 
feeling  the  watchers  of  those  places ;  but  it  is  the  memory  of 
the  slow  failing  of  greatness,  meriting,  perhaps,  the  eclipse  it 
suffered,  that  touches  the  near  feeling  of  sadness.  For  the 
enemies  of  a  man  are  those  of  his  own  household,  and  the 
enemies  of  his  name  too  often  his  heirs,  descendants,  succes- 
sors. Yet,  for  all  their  ultimate  decay,  it  is  rather  to  the 
earlier  impressions  of  the  energy,  brilliance,  and  hardihood  of 
the  fresh  and  vigorous  speculation  of  the  Dominican  friars  of 
Oxford  that  we  turn : 

Their  greatness,  not  their  littleness,  concerns  mankind. 


CHAPTER  V 
THE  PREACHERS 

THE  title  of  Friars  Preachers  given  by  Pope  Hono- 
rius  III  to  the  followers  of  S.  Dominic  meant  a 
daring-  innovation  to  his  contemporaries.  Of 
course  preaching  had  quite  clearly  been  continu- 
ous in  Christendom,  since  it  was  required  inces- 
santly for  the  missionary  enterprise  both  in  extending  and 
in  deepening  the  Kingdom  of  Christ.  To  the  bishops,  first  of 
all,  as  leaders  of  the  host  the  duty  of  expounding  the  teaching 
of  Our  Lord  was  a  solemn  duty  solemnly  committed.  But  it 
was  by  no  means  confined  to  them,  for  even  the  deacons  had 
as  part  of  their  office  the  privilege  of  commenting  on  that 
daily  portion  of  the  sacred  Gospel  that  formed  part  of  the 
liturgical  service.  Moreover,  there  had  begun  some  two  or 
three  centuries  earlier  than  S.  Dominic's  day,  that  strong 
movement  of  lay-preachers  who  found  themselves  forced  to 
take  up  work  which  the  clergy  had  neglected,  and  who  yet, 
because  of  their  very  lack  of  clerical  training,  and  in  spite  of 
every  best  intention  in  the  world,  soon  became  unmeasured 
and  obstinate  in  their  doctrinal  assertions.  But  the  serene 
wisdom  of  Innocent  III,  the  most  original  and  daring  of  the 
mediaeval  Pontiffs,  had  discovered  a  way  out  of  the  frus- 
trated crusade  against  them  by  establishing  among  these 
heretical  and  earnest  apostles,  a  certain  section  of  them  which 
was  to  have  full  licence  to  preach,  so  long  as  its  members 
confined  their  eloquence  to  merely  moral  exhortations  and 
denunciations,  and  left  to  the  better  qualified  clergy  the  task 
of  expounding  for  popular  comprehension  the  dogmas  of  the 
Faith.  This  band,  thus  rescued  from  its  errant  ways,  became 
known  as  the  Tertius  Ordo,  and  had  its  energies  restricted  to 
the  work  of"  Preachingpenance."1  After  this  fashion  S.Francis 
built  up  his  ideal  of  the  Brothers  of  the  Brown  Robe;  but  for 
S.  Dominic  precisely  the  other  half  of  the  need  of  preaching, 
which  was  denied  to  these,  became  the  chance  of  life  to  him. 
The  exposition  of  the  Creed  was,  by  the  declared  compact 
arranged  between  Innocent  III  and  the  Tertius  Ordo,  reserved 
to  the  clergy;  yet  though  the  laity  were  forbidden  to  usurp, 
the  clergy  still  neglected,  or  at  least  were  not  in  a  position  to 
fulfil,  the  real  obligations  this  entailed.  Evidence  enough  of 
the  results  of  this  were  easily  discoverable  in  the  rampant  and 
widening  heresies  in  France,  Spain,  and  Italy.  The  work, 
therefore,  required  doing  by  properly  qualified  clergy,  trained 

1  The  origin  of  the  Tertius  Ordo  here  assumed  has  been  ably  expounded 
and  defended  by  Pere  Mandonnet,  O.  P. ,  Lcs  origincs  de  I'ordo  de  Penitentia 
(Fribourg,  1898),  Les  regies  et  Ic gouvernement  de  I'ordo  de  Penitentia  au 
XIII  Siecle  (Paris,  1902),  and  by  Pere  Mortier,  Maitres  Generaux,  vol.  ii, 
pp.  220-250. 

86 


Ube  preacbers  87 

deeply  in  the  science  of  theology,  and  free  to  devote  their 
whole  attention  to  this  absorbing"  and  laborious  apostolate. 
The  parochial  clergy,  not  through  their  fault,  but  by  the 
necessary  limitations  of  their  stable  office,  had  failed  in  this. 
Hence  a  new  force  was  desired — learned,  mobile,  organized — 
from  some  central  observation  post,  and  sensitive  to  any  im- 
mediate and  sudden  demand  for  help.  Of  this  need  S.  Dominic 
had  first-hand  observation,  when  his  journey  north  from  Spain 
to  Scandinavia  was  interrupted  in  the  territory  of  the  Albi- 
geois.  Hence,  therefore,  began  the  ideal  of  the  Friars 
Preachers. 

This  primitive  notion,  which  made  preaching  for  the  new 
Order  a  work  of  clear  exposition  of  the  Faith,  was  still  further 
confirmed  by  the  teaching  office  which  we  have  seen  to  have 
been  thrust  upon  the  friars,  in  spite  of  themselves.  They 
went  to  the  universities  to  listen ;  they  stayed  there  to 
lecture.  This  helped,  therefore,  to  stiffen  their  tendency  to- 
wards the  intellectual  side  of  the  Church's  occupations,  and 
made  their  sermons  for  this  further  reason  an  appeal  to  the 
intelligence  of  the  faithful.  Everywhere  the  new  style  was 
welcomed,  and  this  instant  success  overcame  every  possible 
hesitancy  of  the  friars,  and  convinced  them  of  the  wisdom  of 
their  choice. 

In  England  this  was  as  clear  as  everywhere  else.  It  is 
certain  that  there  was  far  less  opposition  to  the  doctrinal 
teaching  of  the  Church  here  in  these  islands  than  anywhere 
else  in  the  West,  so  that  the  controversial  side  of  preaching 
was  never  developed  by  the  English  Dominicans.  If  any 
consciousness  of  such  gifts  stirred  any  friar's  heart,  there  lay 
open  the  vast  expanse  of  the  foreign  missions,  to  which  were 
gathered  not  a  few  of  the  English  Province. 

Only  during  the  fifty  years  of  Wycliffite  disturbance  are  the 
English  Dominicans  to  be  found  condemning  errors  by  writing 
controversy  or  preaching  it.  For  the  most  part  their  literary 
remains,  in  so  far  as  the  pulpit  is  concerned,  are  of  that  simple 
nature  that  is  to  be  expected  from  any  English  friar.  Domin- 
ican treatises  are  extant  which  lay  down  the  traditional 
methods  of  the  Order,  and  from  this  it  is  clear  that  no  set 
discourse,  after  the  continental  fashion  with  prologue  and 
points  and  epilogue,  ever  obtained  here  among  the  preaching 
friars.  Rather,  as  became  their  historic  origin,  the  sermons 
were  merely  instructions,  helped  out  by  legend,  anecdote, 
and  political  reference.  It  was  felt,  however,  that  this  might 
easily  grow  wearisome  to  the  listener,  hence  over  and  over 
again  it  was  declared  that  the  preacher  was  not  to  stand 
woodenly  like  a  statue.  He  was  directed  to  put  animation 
into  his  discourse,  all  the  more  necessary  since  on  the  whole 
his  words  being  chiefly  didactic  were  less  likely  to  prove 
arresting  or  absorbing.  To  catch  the  attention  of  his  audience 


88  Zhe  Bnglisb  Dominicans 

when  the  matter  was  of  necessity  largely  intellectual  required 
every  possible  artifice  within  the  limits  of  common  sense. 
Hesitation  in  speech  was  mentioned  by  one  Dominican 
preacher  in  his  book  on  the  Art  of  Preaching  l  as  a  consider- 
able obstacle  to  any  effective  discourse,  so  that  the  mediaeval 
style  of  study,  where  so  much  was  oral  and  so  little  written, 
where  controversy  and  disputation  entered  far  more  largely 
than  they  do  with  us  into  the  curriculum  of  university  educa- 
tion, was  an  invaluable  training  for  the  Dominican  vocation. 
A  monotonous  delivery  was  another  pitfall  to  be  avoided : 
"like  a  boy  who  repeats  lessons  he  does  not  quite  under- 
stand." Facial  expression  and  gesture  were  also  to  be  care- 
fully cultivated  since  these  too  helped  to  drive  home  important 
lessons,  and  to  make  alive  and  human  some  abstract  truth. 
But  of  course  these  are  all  the  trite  maxims  of  every  elocution 
master;  then  as  now  the  ideal  was  to  steer  away  from  dull 
and  listless  discourses,  in  which,  as  one  mediaevalist  wrote, 
the  preacher  evidently  hoped  to  copy  the  action  of  the  Creator 
by  first  casting  man  into  a  deep  sleep  before  providing  him 
with  a  helpmate.  Yet  on  the  other  hand  there  was  a  cor- 
responding danger  in  the  other  extreme,  the  danger  of  rant 
and  over-emphasis,  for  it  was  possible  for  the  friars,  wander- 
ing over  the  whole  country-side  and  swaying  with  their  elo- 
quence the  rabble  in  the  market  squares,  to  adopt  a  style 
totally  out  of  keeping  with  the  solemnity  and  greatness  of 
their  office,  and  savouring  rather  of  the  trade  of  the  mounte- 
bank. Once  made  conscious  of  his  power  to  stir  passion  and 
rouse  to  violence  and  social  aggression  (Wycliffe,  indeed,  as 
we  have  said,  declared  that  the  friars  were  frequently  mere 
revolutionaries),  it  was  tempting  to  the  preacher  to  degrade 
himself  into  a  merely  theatrical  declaimer,  "clerical  actors, 
rather  than  Christian  preachers." 

To  avoid  these  two  extremes,  Thomas  Wallace,  an  English 
Dominican  of  the  fourteenth  century,  insisted  that  it  was 
necessary  to  prepare  very  carefully  beforehand,  to  think  out 
gesture  and  expression,  to  practise  delivery,  and  to  persuade 
some  candid  and  reliable  friend  to  listen  and  criticise.  By  this 
means  he  thought  that  both  slipshodness  and  over-culture 
might  be  avoided.  John  Bromyard,  O.P.,  another  of  the 
great  English  preachers,  laid  especial  stress  upon  the  intense 
need  for  originality.  Earlier  indeed  than  he,  Humbert  de 
Romans  called  the  attention  of  preacher  and  professor  to 
the  importance  of  making  their  theories  entirely  their  own 
before  venturing  to  explain  them  to  others:  "Nothing  can 
be  taught  to  another  until  it  has  first  been  made  one's  own."1 
There  were  always  people  who,  frightened  at  the  labour  and 

1  Card.  Gasquet,  The  Old  English  Bible,  and  other  Essays  (London, 
1908),  pp.  179-187. 

2  Humbertus,  Opera,  vol.  i,  p.  459. 


Uhc  {preacbevs  s9 

energy  required  in  their  vocation,  endeavoured  to  save  them- 
selves drudgery  by  merely  using-  older  sermons  and  lectures, 
either  their  own  or  another's.  This  practice  both  Bromyard 
and  de  Romans  consider  to  be  worse  than  useless.  Bromyard, 
in  a  happy  passage  of  sustained  eloquence,  compares  the  true 
student  of  sacred  oratory  to  the  bee  which  wanders  indeed 
from  flower  to  flower,  and  takes  from  each  all  that  it  has  to 
give ;  but  while  in  this  way  it  is  never  afraid  of  extracting 
good  from  everything,  it  is  careful  also  to  make  of  all  these 
differences  but  one  honey,  to  give  a  distinctive  yet  single 
taste  to  the  produce  of  its  labour.  The  embroiderer  works 
and  threads  and  gathers;  yet  the  result  is  no  patchwork  of 
colour  and  taste,  but  a  single  whole,  continuous  and  one. 

The  matter  of  the  Dominican  sermon  was  supposed,  as  we 
have  said,  generally  to  refer  to  the  Creed,  and  to  be  an  explana- 
tion or  instruction  on  one  or  other  of  the  mysteries  of  faith. 
The  Gospel  appointed  to  the  Sunday  or  feast  day  naturally 
lent  itself  to  this  kind  of  treatment,  and  was  capable,  as 
Wallace  noted,  of  an  infinitely  rich  development.  Yet  while 
thus  putting  some  truth  of  religion  clearly  before  the  people, 
the  preacher  was  asked  to  take  especial  care  that  he  did  not 
simply  evolve  an  argument  without  simultaneously  moving 
piety.  The  first  appeal  indeed  was  to  the  intelligence,  but 
the  purpose  of  this  was  intended  at  the  last  to  stir  the  heart. 
The  people  had  to  be  taught  truth,  but  only  that  they  might 
subsequently  love  beauty.  Hence  Wallace  insists  on  refer- 
ences to  the  Passion  of  Our  Lord,  to  devotion  towards  the 
Mother  of  God,  and  to  the  final  blessedness  of  Heaven  as 
practical  conclusions  to  any  exposition  of  the  Creed. 

But  there  are  other  proofs  besides  this  mere  expression  of 
a  theory  to  show  that  the  sermon  of  the  average  English 
Dominican  was  a  very  homely  as  well  as  a  very  learned  dis- 
course. John  Bromyard  himself  composed  a  Samma  Pre- 
dicantium,1  which  gives  alphabetically  an  immense  amount  of 
information  on  every  subject.  For  example,  "  Dominatio,  or 
lordship,"  provides  him  with  an  opportunity  for  giving  an 
exhaustive  treatise  on  theories  of  government,  constitutional 
ideals,  the  Christian  theory  of  obedience  to  authority,  and 
countless  other  kindred  points.  War  occupies  twenty-four 
columns  of  the  small  quarto  edition  of  1522.  In  it  are  laid 
down  the  principles  to  be  observed  by  Christian  governments 
in  declaring  war  and  in  waging  it,  the  theories  of  those  who 
object  to  all  war  on  principle,  and  a  rejection  of  these  on  the 
strict  grounds  of  Christian  revelation.  Every  point  made  is 
driven  home  by  a  telling  anecdote.  Charlemagne  is  quoted, 
and  Edward  I,  a  simile  which  graphically  describes  the  dogs 
used  in  hunting  is  inserted,  recent  gossip  about  the  behaviour 

1  The  Stimma  Predicant Hum  has  been  frequently  reprinted. 


go  Ube  Englisb  Dominicans 

of  a  nameless  abbot  serves  also  to  point  the  moral  and  adorn 
the  tale.  Incidentally  it  is  interesting-  to  notice  that  Bromyard 
ascribes  the  failure  of  the  Third  Crusade  to  the  vanity  of 
Richard  I  and  the  failure  of  the  earlier  and  later  attempts  at 
crusading  to  the  incorrigible  habit  the  clergy  displayed  of 
insisting  on  personally  directing  the  military  campaigns.  In- 
deed, the  Summa  Predicantium  of  Bromyard  is  a  veritable 
fund  of  information  on  all  mediaeval  teaching,  as  well  as 
containing  items  of  history  and  legendary  anecdotes,  invalu- 
able for  any  writer  on  that  period. 

Preaching  of  this  sort  therefore  required  two  sources  of 
inspiration,  theological  treatises  and  collections  of  anecdotes. 
For  the  first  the  English  friars  had  done  a  great  deal,  and 
their  writings  placed  them  on  a  level  with  the  French 
Province  at  the  head  of  the  intellectual  movement  of  the 
Order;  the  second  also  attracted  their  attention.  The  volume 
of  anecdotes  composed  in  1260  by  Etienne  de  Bourbon,  a 
French  Dominican,  is  the  recognized  example  of  all  others; 
but  in  the  British  Museum  is  a  smaller  collection,  even  more 
valuable  {Royal  7,  D,  ff.  61-1396),  compiled  in  England  in 
the  second  half  of  the  thirteenth  century  by  a  Dominican 
friar  of  Cambridge.  The  author  claims  to  have  heard  Jaques 
de  Vitry  (a  famous  preacher  who  died  in  1240) ;  tells  anecdotes 
about  S.  Edmund  of  Canterbury,  which  he  professes  to  have 
heard  from  the  intimate  friends  of  the  saint ;  quotes  incident- 
ally the  dates  1250  and  1243  as  though  of  recent  memory. 
The  latter  year  is  cited  in  the  description  of  a  ghost  story  con- 
nected with  the  diocese  of  Bath,  and  the  name  of  the  ghost, 
a  monk,  is  only  omitted  out  of  deference  to  the  wishes  of  a 
mutual  friend  obviously  still  living.  Two  of  the  anecdotes 
which  he  relates  he  declares  to  have  heard  quoted  by  Cardinal 
William  of  Savoy  when  preaching  in  the  cemetery  of  the 
Dominicans  at  Cambridge.  This  again  helps  us  to  determine 
the  date  of  the  production,  for  Matthew  Paris  records  a  visit 
of  the  Cardinal  in  1247,  and  explains  that  he  passed  through 
England  on  his  way  to  crown  King  Hakon  of  Norway.  From 
Dover  the  Legate  went  to  King's  Lynn,  where  he  remained 
three  months,  and  either  while  there,  or  on  his  journey,  may  well 
have  called  at  Cambridge.  Cambridge  itself  is  also  referred 
to  in  other  stories,  as  well  as  March  and  Bury  St.  Edmunds; 
though  of  course  even  Oxford,  Leicester,  and  Lincoln,  and 
other  more  remote  places  are  mentioned. 

The  stories  themselves  are  in  many  cases  to  be  found  in 
other  collections,  some  older,  some  evidently  directly  copied 
from  this  manuscript.  A  quaint  story  is  told  of  a  Welsh  lady 
who,  when  exhorted  by  a  Dominican  to  pray  for  her  son's 
murderer,  expressed  her  feelings  in  the  matter  with  extreme 
clearness,  alleging  the  impossibility  for  her  doing  so:  "I 
might  just   as   well    have    murdered    him    myself" — typical, 


Ube  iftreacbers  91 

surely,  of  the  fierce  nature  of  those  hill-hidden  and  warring 
people.  A  curious  account  oiincubi  being-  expelled  from  Scot- 
land by  Dominicans  is  told  with  great  gravity.  Hot  onions 
are  recommended  as  eye-poultices.  A  dying  miser,  who  had 
lost  the  power  of  speech,  while  he  was  receiving  Extreme 
Unction,  immediately  recovered  it;  but  this  is  hardly  an 
edifying  tale,  since  he  had  caught  sight  of  some  one  handling 
his  treasures,  and  his  words  simply  were :  "  Who  's  touching 
my  purse?"  Another  anecdote  of  a  dying  miser  would  be 
difficult  to  work  into  a  sermon,  but  it  shows  at  least  that  a 
sense  of  humour  possessed  the  unknown  compiler  of  this 
manuscript.  On  his  death-bed,  deprived  of  the  power  of  speech, 
the  miser  at  last  consented  to  make  his  will.  The  priest  was 
in  attendance,  while  two  friends  undertook,  by  means  of  ques- 
tioning, to  discover  the  dying  man's  desires.  It  was  agreed 
that  the  property  should  be  divided;  the  difficulty  was  to  find 
out  who  were  to  be  the  fortunate  heirs.  A  device  was  sug- 
gested. The  friends  were  to  call  out  the  names  of  likely  in- 
heritors, and  the  miser  was  to  interject  "  Ha"  when  one  was 
'called  out  whom  he  wished  to  be  on  the  list.  Amongst  others 
the  priest's  name  was  called  out,  the  miser  was  silent,  so,  as 
no  one  was  looking,  the  priest,  who  stood  by  the  bedside, 
pinched  the  dying  man's  ear,  and  caused  such  intense  pain 
that  the  miser  screamed  with  agony.  To  the  friends  at  the 
other  end  of  the  room  this  sounded  like  "  Ha,"  and  thus, 
against  his  will,  and  moved  by  some  higher  power,  the  Church 
inherited.  A  lively  story,  and  its  application  from  the  pulpit 
must  have  served  its  purpose,  if  only  by  attracting  watchful 
interest  among  the  audience  as  to  what  could  possibly  be  the 
moral  to  be  learnt  from  this  pious  story. 

Another  way  in  which  the  flagging  energy  of  the  faithful 
was  stimulated  was  by  the  introduction  of  moralized  natural 
history.  Beasts,  birds,  flowers,  were  made  to  point  lessons 
for  human  kind.  Wallace  has  a  treatise  on  the  Nature  of 
Animals  with  morals  appended,  a  fascinating  study,  the  suc- 
cess of  which  proved  so  immediate  that  he  composed  another 
on  the  Tales  of  Ovid,  where  brief  and  pointed  conclusions 
were  deduced  from  the  mythology  of  Greece  and  Rome.  This 
last  book  was  even  translated  into  French  verse,  and  printed 
at  Bruges  in  1484.  Holcot  took  history  as  his  province,  and 
moralized  that  for  the  benefit  of  his  faithful  hearers,  and  was 
certainly  fitted  by  his  enormous  learning  for  this  huge  task. 
His  reading  was  famous  for  its  wide  range,  but  his  popular 
title  as  "the  firm  and  unwearied  doctor  "—not  a  very  pleas- 
ing surname  for  a  great  preacher — hints  rather  terribly  at  his 
professorial  temper  of  mind,  and  its  emergence  in  the  pulpit. 

Nicholas   Gorham l  was  another  whose  sermon-plans  and 

1  Gasquet,  p.  187. 


92  Ubc  Bnglisb  Dominicans 

material  were  much  used  by  his  contemporaries  and  followers. 
No  other  author  is  so  much  quoted  as  he  in  fifteenth- 
century  English  sermons.  He  had  been  Fellow  of  Merton, 
and  died  Confessor  to  Philip  le  Bel. 

Bishop  Ringstead1  was  another  orator  whose  fame  has  come 
down  to  our  time.  His  diocesan  labours  in  Bangor  can  hardly 
have  occasioned  him  much  pleasure,  since  his  will,  devising 
bequests  of  money  for  poor  churches  and  poor  undergraduates 
at  Oxford  and  Cambridge,  distinctly  excepts  from  all  benefit 
under  his  testament  every  Welshman.  But  in  preparation  for 
his  own  life-work  his  theological  course  was  exceptionally 
rich  for  the  fifteenth  century,  since  he  had  studied  at  both 
English  Universities,  and  also  in  Italy  and  France.  It  is  said 
of  him  that  his  style  of  discourse  was  mild  and  gentle,  and 
that  he  never  attempted  any  violent  rebukes  as  being  wholly 
opposed  to  his  natural  dispositions.  Perhaps  it  was  just  this 
that  made  all  understanding  between  him  and  his  diocese  so 
hopeless.  His  commentary  on  the  Proverbs  of  Solomon  was 
found  by  Leland  in  the  libraries  of  S.  Peter's  College,  Cam- 
bridge, and  of  the  Dominicans  at  Exeter. 

But  it  is  clear  that  preaching  was  not  altogether  so  simple 
and  gentle  an  affair  with  the  other  Dominicans  as  with  Ring- 
stead.  Robert  Bacon,2  said  to  have  been  a  relation  of  Roger's, 
and  in  his  day  the  most  respected  Dominican  professor  at 
Oxford,  for  whom  even  the  critical  Matthew  Paris  has  nothing 
but  praise,  made  a  famous  attack  in  his  sermon  before 
Henry  III  on  the  foreign  political  influence  that  surrounded 
the  royal  court.  In  1233  the  King  held  a  Parliament  at 
Oxford,  but  the  barons  refused  to  attend  it;  "and  why 
they  did  so,"  says  Antony  Wood  (in  his  Annals,  vol.  i,  p.  216), 
"the  Chronicles  will  tell  you  at  large.  Robert  Bacon,  who 
used  to  preach  before  the  King  and  the  Prelates  with  great 
applause,  freely  told  him  if  he  did  not  remove  from  him  Peter 
de  Rupibus,  Bishop  of  Winchester,  and  Peter  de  Rievallis, 
his  kinsman  (in  the  first  of  which  the  King  reposed  much 
trust,  and  by  him  was  persuaded  and  ruled  in  most  of  his 
actions)  he  would  never  be  at  quiet.  Tis  said  also  that  Roger 
Bacun,  a  Franciscan  of  pleasant  wit,  did  second  Robert's 
advice,  telling  the  King  that  Petrae  (stones),  and  Rupes 
(rocks)  were  most  dangerous  things  at  sea,  alluding  to  the 
Bishop's  name,  Peter  de  Rupibus."  But  as  Roger  Bacon 
would  have  been  at  that  date  only  fourteen  years  old,  this 
saying  also  should  be  attributed  to  Robert. 

In  1359  another  Dominican  got  into  trouble  at  Oxford  by 
preaching  against  the  Sophists  or  Art  Faculty.  Such  opposi- 
tion was  aroused  by  the  good  friar's  words  that  he  was  driven 
to  retract  his  opinions  and  to  recant  in  public  all  his  "  horrid 

1  Echard,  vol.  i,  p.  672.  2  Ibid.,  vol.  i,  p.  118. 


TLhc  fl>reacbers  93 

allegations."  Logic,  he  was  forced  to  declare,  was  the  door 
to  all  the  sciences,  including-  the  sacred  sciences.  Honourable 
in  itself,  it  had  this  further  recommendation,  that  it  paid.  As 
a  career  it  secured  a  fitting-  emolument,  hence  if  his  words 
had  possibly  dissuaded  anyone  from  the  study  of  the  arts,  the 
preacher  trusted  that  what  he  had  just  said  would  induce 
them  to  return  to  their  schools. 

A  last  instance,  farther  afield,  may  be  given  of  the  incon- 
venience to  the  preacher  of  his  preaching,  which  sometimes 
arose  from  a  deep  devotion  to  truth.  In  1331,  Thomas  Wal- 
lace,1 the  great  Dominican  orator  of  the  fourteenth  century, 
whom  we  have  so  frequently  quoted,  delivered  an  address 
before  Pope  John  XXII  on  27  December.  The  subject  chosen, 
the  lot  of  the  soul  after  death,  was  not  one  which  could  in 
that  age  pass  unchallenged,  or  have  been  very  innocently 
selected,  for  it  was  well  known  that  the  Pope  had  a  private 
theory  of  his  own  on  the  subject  which  was  opposed  to 
Catholic  tradition,  and  which,  finally,  though  he  had  never 
taught  it  officially  since  he  succeeded  to  the  prerogatives  of 
Peter,  on  his  death-bed  he  publicly  recanted.  Pope  John  held 
that  the  souls  of  the  dead  could  not  enter  heaven  till  they 
were  clothed  in  mortal  flesh,  so  that  the  saints  waited  in  some 
dim  and  remote  Limbo  till  at  the  very  end  of  the  world  the 
resurrection  of  their  bodies  would  enable  them  to  enter  into 
joy.  This  Wallace,  carried  away  by  his  devotion  to  the  teach- 
ing of  S.  Thomas  and  the  living  feeling  of  the  people,  at- 
tacked with  no  little  vehemence.  The  Grand  Inquisitor,  a 
Franciscan,  personally  agreed  with  John  XXII,  and  therefore 
shut  up  the  daring  English  friar  for  a  year  in  prison,  not 
ostensibly  for  differing  theologically,  but  for  reputed  irrever- 
ence to  the  person  of  the  Sovereign  Pontiff.  But  Wallace  was 
a  well-known  character  in  Europe,  and  found  champions 
everywhere.  His  Order  began  a  crusade  in  his  favour,  which 
was  enthusiastically  taken  up  by  the  University  of  Paris.  At 
the  urgent  request  of  this  powerful  body  the  Pope  surrendered 
the  friar  to  them,  who  at  once  let  him  go  scot  free  on  the 
plea  that  he  had  not  intended  to  be  irreverent,  the  supposed 
irreverence  being  only  his  remark  that  since  the  defenders  of 
this  unorthodox  opinion  misquoted  all  Dominican  authorities 
he  could  not  hope  himself  to  escape  their  malignant  criticism. 
He  had  paid  in  any  case  the  price  of  truth-telling  and 
sincerity. 

But  the  Order  of  S.  Dominic  had  always  recognized  other 
forms  of  preaching  besides  mere  pulpit  oratory.  When  Fra 
Angelico,  whose  power  of  eloquence  in  speech  was  small,  was 
accordingly  jeered  at  by  his  fellow  novices  in  phrases  that 
bade  him  seek  his  vocation  anywhere  but  among  Preaching 

1  Mortier,  vol.  iii,  p.  76;  C.U.P.,  vol.  ii,  pp.  414-425,  440;  Teret,  La 
Faculti  de  Thtfologie  de  Paris,  vol.  iii  (Paris,  1896). 


94  Ghe  Bnglisb  Dominicans 

Friars,  his  Novice-Master,  Lawrence  of  Ripafratta  (now 
beatified),  forbade  their  taunts  by  noting  that  long-  after  all 
their  sermons  were  dust-covered  and  forgotten,  and  their 
voices  silenced  in  death,  the  pictured  gospel  of  the  artist 
would  still  be  reaching  ever-widening  audiences.  That  is 
obviously  a  prophecy  amply  fulfilled.  It  is  also  part  of  the 
Dominican  tradition.  Roger  Dymoke,  dedicating  in  1395  his 
refutation  of  Wycliffe  "to  the  Most  Glorious  and  Revered 
Prince  and  Lord,  the  Lord  Richard,  by  divine  favour  King  of 
England  and  France,"  styles  himself  the  King's  "most 
humble  orator  and  most  poor  preacher  and  liegeman  .  .  . 
unworthy  professor  of  Scripture  and  the  least  of  the  Order  of 
Preachers."  Perhaps  the  "  poor  preacher  "  was  a  fitting  title, 
in  that  he  was  poor  in  speech,  but  he  had  found  at  least  a 
way  to  sound  the  praises  of  truth.  The  chief  condition  of  true 
eloquence  is  that  it  should  be  alive.  Herein  then  may  be 
the  value  of  pen  and  pencil  and  palette  for  a  Preaching 
Friar. 

In  music  we  hear  of  John  Roose  of  York,  but  his  business 
lay  rather  in  the  mechanical  trade  of  organ-building  than  in 
organ-playing.  He  repaired  both  the  great  organ  of  the 
Minster,  and  the  lesser  one  in  the  Lady  Chapel.1  In  literature 
we  may  place  the  name  of  Robert  Bacon,  or  whatever  other 
Dominican  wrote  the  noble  Ancren  Riwle  (cf.  McNabb,  O.P. , 
Moderti  Langtiage  Review,  vol.  xi,  No.  1,  January  1916,  pp.  1-8), 
and  of  Friar  Geoffrey,  the  grammarian  who  composed  a  well- 
known  Latin-English  Dictionary,  which  still  in  its  printed 
form  figures  in  modern  catalogues  of  second-hand  books;  its 
value  for  us,  however,  lies  rather  in  its  fascinating  collection 
of  Norfolk  dialects  than  in  their  Latin  equivalents.2  In  art  there 
is  the  strange  name  of  John  Cifrewas  (or  Sifrewas),  an  old 
west  country  family,  whose  wonderful  illuminations  give 
splendour  to  the  Sherborne  Missal  in  the  possession  of  the 
Duke  of  Northumberland,  and  to  the  Lovell  Psalter.  At  a 
period  of  rather  decadent  ornamentation  his  miniatures  and 
foliated  pages  are  miracles  of  beauty  and  sober  good  taste. 
Medical  science  also  naturally  found  much  favour  among  the 
friars,  since  they  lived  wholly  in  the  towns  where  the  want  of 
sanitation  made  the  huddled  existence  of  the  poor  a  very 
haunt  of  disease  and  death.  From  the  days  of  John  of 
S.  Giles,  a  professor  of  medicine  at  Montpelier,  who  had  cured 
of  fever  Grosseteste  and  the  young  Earl  of  Gloucester,  both 
de  Montfort's  friends,  right  on  there  was  a  constant  stream 
of  Dominican  writers  on  medical  subjects. 

Robert  of  York 3  was  a  well-known  authority  who  specu- 
lated freely,  not  only  on  herbal  properties,  but  on  alchemy  and 

1  Yorkshire  Archaeological  Journal,  1881,  pp.  19  and  20. 

2  Archaeological  Journal,  1884,  p.  5. 

3  Echard,  vol.  i,   p.  625. 


Ube  ipreacbers  95 

magic.  From  him,  it  was  stated,  nature  had  kept  none 
of  her  secrets.  Henry  Daniel1  also  wrote  at  great  length  on 
medicine,  diagnosing  diseases  of  all  kinds,  and  prescribing 
remedies  that  savour  far  more  of  modern  methods  of  diet 
than  of  actual  chemist's  doings.  Noblest  of  all  these  was 
Holcot.  A  student  of  universal  knowledge,  he  had  dabbled 
in  surgery,  in  medicine,  as  well  as  in  every  other  art  and 
craft  then  discovered ;  yet  his  greatness  was  shown  not  in 
his  devices  but  in  his  death,  for  at  the  outbreak  of  the  Black 
Death  in  1349  he  set  himself  to  help  and  nurse  the  infected 
poor,  and,  catching  the  contagion  from  his  patients,  added 
another  name  to  the  medical  faculty's  roll  of  honour. 

History  also  attracted  the  writers  of  the  English  Province. 
As  early  as  1284  John  Rufus  2  wrote  a  Chronicle  of  Popes  and 
Roman  Emperors,  and  worked  out  under  more  original  con- 
ditions the  A  nnals  of  Cornwall.  Thomas  Stubbs,3  a  hundred 
years  later,  completed  to  his  own  time  the  Chronicles  of  the 
Archbishops  of  York,  which  remains  our  chief  authority  for  a 
good  deal  of  the  period  covered  by  it.  Its  last  reprint  was  in 
London,  1652.  Holcot's  moralizing  of  history  (British 
Museum,  Arundel  MSS.,  cod.  384)  has  already  been  men- 
tioned in  another  connection.  But  the  prince  of  mediaeval 
historians  for  accuracy  and  sheer  historic  worth  is  Nicholas 
Trivet,  an  English  Dominican.  The  son  of  a  Justice  in  Eyre 
of  Henry  III,  he  received  some  rigid  training  that  made  re- 
straint and  truth  the  marks  of  life  and  work.  A  chatty  com- 
panion (his  name  appears  in  the  royal  accounts  as  having 
helped  to  entertain  the  clerks  who  watched  by  the  body  of 
Piers  Gaveston  during  their  prolonged  sojourn  at  Oxford),4  he 
deftly  introduced  here  and  there  into  his  chronicles  little 
touches  that  make  his  pages  sparkle  with  life.  In  his  devo- 
tional work  on  the  Mirror  of  the  Priesthood ,  his  love  of  quaint 
conceits  is  displayed,  for  he  notes  in  the  preface:  "If  any 
desire  out  of  curiosity  to  find  the  name  of  the  author  of  this 
work,  let  him  begin  from  the  Prologue  and  take  the  capital 
letters  in  order."  By  this  means  out  of  112  quarto  pages  this 
acrostic   is    revealed :    frater  Nicholas   trevet   de   ordine 

PREDICATORUM     HUNC     TRACTATUM      COMPILAVIT     AD     HONOREM 

dei — Friar  Nicholas  Trivet  of  the  Order  of  Preachers  com- 
piled this  tractate  to  the  honour  of  God.  Another  devotional 
work,  his  Commentary  on  the  Psalter,  is  dedicated  to  John  of 
Bristol,  the  contemporary  Dominican  provincial,  while  his 
gloss  on  the  Declamations  of  Seneca  is  inscribed  to  his  fellow 
friar,  John  of  Levinham  or  Lenham,  "confessor  to  the  illus- 
trious King  of  England."  In  his  preface  to  these  Declama- 
tions, Trivet  states  that  in  the  winter  of  his  twenty-eighth 

1  Echard,  vol.  i,  p.  676.  2  Ibid.,  vol.  i,  p.  396. 

3  Ibid.,  vol.  i,  p.  671. 

K  Reliquary,  1883,  p.  155  ;  Annales,  p.  xx. 


96  Ube  JStiQlisb  Dominicans 

year  "  my  old  illness  in  a  more  violent  form,  making-  my 
limbs  full  of  aches,  my  nerves  and  joints  all  paining  and  my 
whole  body  apparently  broken  up,"  had  settled  on  him.  This 
had  so  absolutely  crippled  him  that  he  had  practically  aban- 
doned the  undertaking  of  his  Commentary  as  completely  be- 
yond his  power,  but  "  so  many  people  have  asked  me  for  an 
interpretation  of  Seneca's  words  that  I  resumed  my  task,  and 
trusting  in  God's  help  and  the  merits  of  my  fellow-friars  (for 
whose  increase  I  have  devoted  all  my  labours)  I  took  courage, 
and  now  send  the  results  to  you  for  your  good  pleasure,  that 
you  who  first  gave  me  the  motive  might  first  taste  of  the 
fruit.  Yet  do  I  put  condition  to  your  possessing  these  notes, 
to  wit,  that  you  would  remember  in  your  prayers  me  who  am 
halfway  betwixt  life  and  death."  Beyond  this  passing  refer- 
ence to  himself  there  is  little  in  his  works  to  guide  us  in  our 
desire  to  find  out  more  about  the  writer.  He  taught  with 
some  distinction  at  Oxford,  where  his  signature  is  appended 
to  a  condemnation  by  the  University  of  the  opinions  of 
Wycliffe.  After  his  name  a  note  is  added  in  the  original  manu- 
script to  say  that  when  he  had  signed  the  condemnation  he 
returned  immediately  to  the  schools  to  continue  his  lecture, 
so  that  he  must  actually  in  1315  have  been  holding  his  pro- 
fessorial chair  in  Oxford.1  His  annals,  from  the  Creation  to 
the  Incarnation,  and  thence  to  the  fourth  century,  show  him 
to  us  once  again  in  the  same  character  as  did  his  Declama- 
tiones  Senecae,  for  in  the  preface  he  confesses  that  he  had 
here  also  once  given  up  the  project  and  then  subsequently 
resumed  it  at  the  request  of  Hugh  of  Engolisme,  "  Arch- 
deacon of  Canterbury  and  Legate  of  Our  Lord  the  Pope." 
Begun  a  long  time  before,  the  work  had  grown  wearisome  to 
him ;  moreover,  various  interruptions  had  broken  in  upon  his 
time,  and  disgusted  him  from  continuing  a  labour  which  was 
not  altogether  congenial.  Truth  to  tell  it  appears  evident  that 
Nicholas  was  at  this  period  considerably  alive  to  the  stir  and 
bustle  of  his  own  time,  and  was  really  out  of  touch  with  the 
far-off  interests  of  earlier  days.  Quick,  affectionate,  steeped 
in  the  full  stream  of  national  movements  and  foreign  policy, 
easily  moved  to  begin,  as  easily  depressed  and  discouraged, 
learned,  observant,  chatty,  and  accurate,  it  was  only  the 
nearer  past  that  held  his  fancy.  Yet  because  it  was  the  con- 
vention of  all  chronicles  to  begin,  scholastic-wise,  from  the 
beginning,  embarking  upon  the  tale  of  more  ancient  happen- 
ings, he  had  first  to  cover  the  whole  story  of  the  universe 
before  he  could  devote  himself  to  the  period  that  really  in- 
terested him.  Tired  of  the  business,  yet  "under  pressure  of 
my  love  for  Hugh  and  my  gratitude  for  Hugh's  kindness  to 

1  The  condemnation  is  dated  February,  1315;  the  day  noted  as  that  on 
which  he  dined  with  the  custodians  of  Gaveston's  body  is  1  December 
I3I4- 


XI  CO  LAS  TRIVET,  O.P.  (1258- 1328) 

THE    ENGLISH    CHRONICLER,    FROM    A    MS.    AT 

qiken's  COLLEGE,  OXFORD 
From  <t  photograph  by  Gillman  mid  Co.,  Ltd.,  Oxford 


[To  face  p.  96. 


TLhe  preacbers  97 

me  and  my  Order  "  he  struggled  on  to  the  fourth  century. 
Beyond  that  no  human  inducement  could  move  him.  His 
next  work  ignored  the  succeeding  centuries,  and  began  the 
Annals  of  the  Angevins  from  1136  to  1307.  Here  were  human 
figures,  alive,  real,  almost  contemporary,  so  his  interest 
quickens  and  his  story  runs  easily.  His  authorities  are  all 
quoted,  his  descriptions  are  carefully  referred  to  first-hand 
witnesses  of  the  men  and  their  events,  his  judgement  is  clear, 
accurate,  unprejudiced.  In  describing  Henry  III  and  Edward  I, 
he  is  touching  on  matters  that  fell  within  his  personal  ex- 
perience, and  his  words  are  more  valuable.  His  sudden,  stac- 
cato phrases  call  up  the  short,  sturdy  figure  of  Henry  III, 
with  his  drooping  eye-lids  x  which  Edward  I  even  more  pro- 
nouncedly inherited,  for  in  Edward's  case  even  the  colour  of 
the  left  eye  was  almost  entirelv  obscured  to  an  observer  by 
this  over-hanging  lid.2  Henry  was  for  Trivet  "in  worldly 
affairs  imprudent,  but  in  spiritual  affairs  most  devout."3  It 
is  the  pious  side  of  the  King's  character  that  most  interests 
him.  For  example,  he  notes  that  daily  the  King  heard  three 
sung  Masses  {cum  nota,  i.e.,  chaunted  to  plain  song)  and 
several  low  Masses.  To  him  S.  Louis  of  France  urged  one 
day,  when  the  two  lay  encamped  in  France,  in  half-scandal- 
ized banter,  that  it  was  also  a  good  thing  to  hear  sermons, 
which  Henry  apparently  avoided.  The  Saint's  rebuke  was 
answered  with  "  courtly  humour,"  says  the  chronicler  (with 
deep  mystic  insight,  we  would  further  add):  "  I  would  rather 
see  my  Friend  than  hear  another  speak  ever  so  well  of  Him." 
But  despite  the  favourable  touches  given  to  Henry's  descrip- 
tion, it  is  Edward  I  who  is  the  hero  of  his  story.4  The  fine, 
kingly  figure,  towering  above  court  and  crowd,5  is  the  sub- 
ject that  most  fascinates  Friar  Nicholas.  The  beautiful  hair 
of  Edward  as  a  boy,  flaxen  almost  to  silver,  then  growing 
dark,  then  in  older  age  "swan-white,"  is  a  memory  he  can 
never  forget.  Persuasive  in  speech,  with  splendid  physique, 
his  hands  never  for  an  instant  still,  but  nervously  playing 
with  and  breaking  any  object  near,  magnificent,  impatient, 
quickly  roused,  and  as  quickly  soothed,  with  the  Angevin  love 
of  war  and  the  chase,  the  figure  of  the  King  is  made  instant 
with  life.  Even  Edward's  humour  and  respect  for  his  parents 
is  told  of,  and  this  by  the  happy  narration  of  an  event  that 
happened  in  1281.  He  was  then  paying  a  visit  to  the 
Queen-Mother,  who  was  living  at  Amesbury  with  the  nuns 
of  the  famous  monastery  there:6  "It  happened  that  during 
his  visit  a  certain  fellow  was  brought  in  to  see  his  mother, 
pretending  that  after  many  years  of  blindness  he  had  re- 
covered his  sight  at  the  tomb  of  Henry,  the  late  king.  But 
King  Edward  knew  the  man  to  be  a  famous  impostor,  long 

1  A?inales,  p.  280.  2  Ibid.,  p.  281.  3  Ibid.,  p.  280. 

4  Ibid.,  p.  280.  5  Ibid.,  p.  281.  6  Ibid.,  p.  302. 

H 


98  Zhe  BnoUsb  Dominicans 

accustomed  to  lying  and  fraud,  and  begged  his  mother  to 
give  no  credence  to  the  tale.  She,  however,  only  grew  furi- 
ously angry  with  him  for  doubting  so  evident  a  miracle 
wrought  by  his  father's  memory,  and  ordered  him  out  of  her 
room.  Humbly  he  obeyed  her,  and  coming  out  of  the  door 
ran  into  the  Dominican  Provincial,  Friar  Hugh  of  Manchester, 
an  exceptionally  discreet  and  learned  man,  on  terms  of  inti- 
mate friendship  with  the  King.  Edward,  button-holing  him, 
told  him  the  story  of  his  mother's  anger,  adding:  "  I  know 
so  well  my  father's  love  of  justice  that  I  am  sure  he  would  be 
much  more  likely  to  have  taken  away  the  sight  of  such  a 
villain  than  have  restored  it  to  such  a  lump  of  iniquity." 
Evidently  Edward  convinced  the  Queen  in  the  end,  for  he  left 
next  day  for  Wales  "  with  his  mother's  leave."  All  through 
this  part  of  the  work  there  could  have  been  certainly  no  need 
for  John  of  Lenham  or  Hugh  of  Engolesme  to  press  him  for- 
ward. It  is  the  figures  themselves  moving  in  and  out  of  the 
world,  and  folk  he  knew  so  well,  that  compelled  his  fingers, 
despite  their  rheumatism,  to  trace  each  slow  letter  till  the 
whole  was  complete.  Nor  is  he  blind  to  his  own  word-skill, 
for  he  unconsciously  contrasts  to  his  own  (like  only  in  their 
careful  truth)  the  writings  of  Ralph  Bocking,  the  Preaching 
Friar,  who,  as  Chaplain  of  S.  Richard  of  Chichester,  had 
written  the  life  of  that  Saint.  This  biography,  he  informs  us, 
though  true  and  accurate,  is  "very  rough  in  style."1 

What  is  certainly  to  be  regretted  is  that  the  Annals  stop 
with  the  death  of  Edward  I,  for  we  still  need  that  the  events 
of  the  next  reign  should  be  told  us  by  someone  friendly  to 
luckless  Edward  of  Carnarvon.  The  poor  Prince  of  Wales 
succeeded  to  the  prestige  of  his  father,  which  was  great  in- 
deed, but  no  less  to  his  economic  mismanagement,  which  was 
even  greater.  The  consequent  breakdown  of  the  Exchequer, 
which  occasioned  most  of  the  troubles  of  the  reign,  was 
hardly  to  be  laid  to  the  shoulders  of  Edward  II,  nor  was  the 
failure  of  the  Scotch  war  so  much  royal  as  baronial  in  its 
cause.  Now  it  is  just  here  that  in  the  interests  of  historic 
truth  we  should  so  welcome  a  Dominican  portrait,  for  Ed- 
ward II  held  always  nearest  to  his  heart  the  Preaching  Friars. 
It  is  to  them  that  the  remains  of  his  murdered  friend,  Piers 
Gaveston,  were  entrusted  ;  and,  until  the  fine  church  of  King's 
Langley  was  finished,  it  was  again  among  the  Blackfriars  of 
Oxford  that  the  dear  body  rested.  Publicly,  in  the  official 
records  of  the  Patent  Rolls,  Edward  particularly  insisted  on 
his  great  love  for  "the  glorious  confessor,  Blessed  Dominic."2 
The  friars  were  his  friends  in  life,  at  death,  and  after  death. 
Young  men  were  always  fond  of  him,  Dominicans  no  less 
than  others,  though  perhaps  here  the  radiant  habit  added  an 

1  A?uiales,  p.  242.  2  P.R.O.  JR.  P.,  8  Edw.  II,  p.  2,  m.  8. 


Zhc  ipreacbers  99 

idealizing"  touch  to  the  King's  delight  in  youth.  Yet  Trivet, 
who  lived  one  year  beyond  Edward's  reign,  is  vexatiously 
silent;  perhaps  he  disagreed  with  the  King,  or  feared  the 
vengeance  of  the  nobles,  and,  rather  than  lift  a  pen  against 
his  friend  and  join  the  throng  of  evil  speakers,  preferred  to 
leave  in  silence  the  turmoil  of  those  years. 

In  these  ways,  by  voice  and  pen,  the  English  friars 
preached  truth  to  their  Christian  folk  in  these  islands;  but  to 
the  Jews  also  they  felt  they  had  their  message.  Their  first 
settlement  was  in  the  Jewry  at  Oxford,  though  it  can  be  dis- 
puted whether  their  Domits  Conversorum  was  more  connected 
with  converts  from  Judaism  than  with  public  accounts.1  As 
early  as  1242  Robert  Bacon  has  two  converts  to  his  credit, 
for  whom  the  King  paid  40^.  for  keep,  and  a  mark  extra  for 
clothing;  by  law  every  Jew  was  a  royal  chattel,  for  whom  the 
crown  was  responsible.  In  1245  Bacon  again  is  mentioned  in 
the  Patent  Rolls  as  being  able  to  furnish  the  name  of  an 
apostate  Jew  who  had  even  been  advanced  to  the  office  of 
acolyte  before  he  had  thus  returned  to  his  father's  faith.  The 
Sheriff  of  Oxford  was  directed  to  pursue  and  arrest  him. 
Eleven  years  later,  at  the  instance  of  John  of  Darlington,  a 
Dominican  councillor  in  whom  Henry  III  reposed  much  trust, 
another  convert  Jew,  named  John  (perhaps  out  of  devotion  to 
the  friar  who  had  received  his  abjuration),  came  up  before  the 
courts.  He  had  been  implicated  in  the  crucifixion  of  a  boy  at 
Lincoln,  and  had  evidently  been  among  the  Hebrews  brought 
up  in  chariots  from  that  city,  as  Matthew  Paris  informs  us, 
and  placed  as  much  for  protection  as  for  punishment  in  the 
Tower  of  London.2  The  Constable  was  commanded  to  sur- 
render the  said  John  to  the  friar's  keeping.  From  an  apostolic 
point  of  view  there  was  obviously  much  occasion  then  for  in- 
tercourse between  the  Dominicans  and  the  Jews,  and  it  was 
heightened  considerably  by  the  extreme  interest  taken  by  the 
friars  in  Scriptural  studies.  Greek  was  unknown  except  to  a 
few  special  students  in  the  West,  but  Hebrew  was  a  general 
accomplishment  for  any  Biblical  scholar.  Special  Dominican 
convents  in  Spain  were  especially  set  apart  for  the  pursuit  of 
Semitic  languages,  and  in  one  case  known  to  us,  actually  a 
Hebrew  professor,  a  Rabbi  and  not  a  Christian,  was  ap- 
pointed to  a  Chair  in  a  Dominican  House  of  Studies  in  the 
thirteenth  century.3  It  was  only  under  the  stifling  reaction, 
induced  by  a  pagan  renaissance,  that  any  restriction  was  put 
to  the  study  of  Hebrew.  Yet  from  the  beginning  the  ways  of 
learning  were  not  always  smooth  or  straight.  Friar  Richard  of 
Reading,  well  thought  of  in  London  as  a  preacher,  set  himself 
.-to  acquire  a  knowledge  of  that  sacred  tongue,  the  better  to 

1  Reliquary,  1883,  pp.  145,  148. 

2  Mat.  Paris,  vol.  v,  pp.  519,  591  ;  P.R.O.  R.  P.,  40  Hen.  Ill,  m.  18. 

3  Mortier,  vol.  i,  pp.  519,  520. 


ioo  ubc  Englisb  Dominicans 

understand  the  text  of  Scripture.  He  put  himself  under  the 
tuition  of  a  certain  Jew,  whose  careful  teaching  so  far  over- 
came him  that  he  joined  the  Jewish  religion  under  the  name 
of  Haggai.  The  subsequent  proceedings  were  prompt  and 
presumably  effective.  The  King  in  1275  put  the  matter  into 
the  hands  of  the  contemporary  Archbishop  of  Canterbury, 
actually  the  Dominican  Robert  Kilwardby,  bidding  him 
secure  the  capture  of  the  apostate  friar,  whose  name,  how- 
ever, does  not  anywhere  afterwards  occur.1  Of  course  he  may 
have  been  done  away  with,  but  the  usual  method  of  attack 
was  wholly  persuasive.  On  one  occasion  2  the  Blackfriars  were 
denied  all  help  in  food,  and  reduced  to  starvation  because  of 
their  defence  of  falsely  accused  Hebrews;  on  another  their 
Provincial  petitioned  the  King,  who  seconded  his  efforts, 
against  any  attempt  on  the  part  of  sheriffs  and  bailiffs  to 
impede  the  Jews  from  becoming  Christians,  as  the  friars 
were  most  anxious  to  preach  to  them.3 

The  attitude  of  the  Dominicans  to  the  crusades  was  strik- 
ingly curious.  For  while  they  energetically  took  up  the  work 
of  preaching  and  collecting  money  for  the  chivalrous  purpose 
of  freeing  the  sepulchre  of  Christ  from  pagan  ownership, 
they  really  developed  a  theory  which  overthrew  the  whole 
reason  for  securing  this  by  force  of  arms.  As  early  as  1229 
we  hear  of  an  English  friar,  Walter,  actually  with  the  armies 
of  the  Cross,  preaching  to  them  and  saying  Mass  in  Jerusalem 
after  the  capture  of  the  city;4  from  12285  onwards  Ivo,  an 
Englishman,  governed  the  Province  of  the  Holy  Land  till 
1235;  and  in  12686  Geoffrey,  an  English  Dominican,  became 
Bishop  of  Hebron  and  Vicar  of  the  Latin  Patriarch  of 
Jerusalem ;  but,  of  course,  their  chief  work  was  done  at 
home.  By  royal  command,  on  12  March  1252,7  the  Preaching 
Friars  and  Friars  Minor  were  told  to  send  to  London  a  suffi- 
cient number  of  prudent  preachers  to  work  up  the  enthusiasm 
of  the  people;  and  this  was  supplemented  in  the  May  of  that 
year  by  an  appeal  to  the  Archbishops  and  Bishops  to  urge 
all  the  friars  within  their  own  dioceses  to  do  this  locally  as 
well.  Moreover,  King  Henry  III  suggested  that  in  each 
diocese  a  strong  place  should  be  set  -apart  for  storing  the 
money  collected  by  the  friars.  Two  years  later,  by  the  hands 
of  William  of  Fresney,  the  Dominican  Archbishop  of  Rages 
or  Edessa,  whose  tombstone,  built  into  a  farmhouse  at 
Rhuddlan,  still  shows  the  friar  in  his  pontifical  habit, 
Henry  III  sent  a  letter  to  the  Pope,  asking  that  his  vow  of 

1  Merry  England,  1889,  p.  439.  2  Ibid.,  p.  438. 

3  P.R.O.  R.  P.,  8  Edw.  I,  p.  i,  m.  27. 

4  Mat.  Paris,  vol.  iii,  p.  177. 

5  Palmer,  Life  of  Philip  Thomas  Howard,  p.  21. 
0  Echard,  vol.  i,  pp.  282,  283. 

7  P.R.O.  P.  C,  36  Hen.  Ill,  m.  22  dorso;  m.  16  dorso. 


Qftc  preacbers  101 

going-  to  the  Holy  Land  might  be  commuted  into  a  crusade 
against  the  Saracens  of  the  North  African  shore.1  This  idea 
was  suggested  by  the  fact  that,  in  his  treaty  of  peace  with 
Henry,  the  King  of  Castile  had  put  down  among  the  articles 
of  agreement  a  joint  expedition  for  this  purpose.  However, 
in  1255,  Pope  Alexander  IV  declined  to  accede  to  this,  not 
through  any  fault  in  the  eloquence  of  William  of  Fresney,  as 
he  is  careful  to  note,  but  only  because  even  louder  and  more 
touching  was  the  despairing  cry  of  "  that  miserable  Jerusalem 
Kingdom."2  Matthew  Paris  wickedly  declares  that  the  Pope 
offered  instead  a  crusade  against  Apulia;  but  the  official 
letter  does  not  make  any  such  suggestion.  Matthew,  as  usual, 
retails  just  the  spiteful  gossip  that  rumour  brought  to  his 
abbey.  Anyway,  Henry  III  fell  into  line  with  the  rest  of 
Christendom  again,  and  asked  the  Provincial  to  appoint  in 
the  next  Provincial  Chapter  friars  to  preach  the  Cross  in 
every  diocese,  as  desired  by  the  Bishop  of  Norwich,  who  had 
been  appointed  to  oversee  the  whole  business  of  the  crusade. 
A  few  pickings  of  money  left  over  from  the  collections  {£10 
in  all)  were  allowed  to  stay  at  Haverfordwest  with  the 
Dominicans,  by  leave  of  Rostand,  the  Papal  Legate.3  Almost 
the  last  reference  to  the  Preaching  Friars  and  the  crusade  is 
the  letter  of  Geoffrey,  Bishop  of  Hebron  and  Vicar  of  the 
Patriarch  of  Jerusalem,  dated  5  October  1280,  wherein  that 
Dominican  prelate  gives  to  King  Edward  I  a  full  account  of 
the  affairs  of  the  Holy  Land.4 

We  have  said  that  this  is  almost  the  last  reference  to  the 
crusade  among  the  English  Dominican  records,  for  a  new 
ideal  had  at  that  very  date  caught  the  enthusiastic  and 
adventurous  chivalry  of  the  friars.  No  longer  will  they  stir 
up  the  forces  of  Europe  to  dispossess  the  Saracen  of  the 
Holy  Sepulchre.  An  easier  way  to  secure  its  being  in  Chris- 
tian hands  suddenly  dawned  upon  them.  They  would  convert 
the  Saracens  themselves ;  then  all  need  of  armed  intervention 
would  cease.  In  the  different  provinces  of  the  Order  this  new 
vision  was  welcomed  with  devotion.  Its  foremost  patron  was 
Pope  John  XXII  (1316-1334),  who  found  time  amidst  his  war 
of  pamphlets  and  swords  with  Louis  of  Bavaria  to  carry  on  a 
huge  attack  of  missionary  enterprise.  Hardly  had  the  Pope 
been  two  years  upon  the  throne  than  he  addressed  a  letter0  to 
"  our  beloved  sons  the  Friars  Preachers  in  the  lands  of  the 
Saracens,  Pagans,  Greeks,  Bulgars,  Cuman  Tartars,  Iberi, 
Alani,  Gazaenes,  Goths,  Ruthenians,  Jacobites,  Nubians, 
Nestorians,   Georgians,  Armenians,   Indians,   Macolites,  and 

1  Gumbley,  O.P.,  Journal  of Flintshire  Hist.  Society  (1914-1915). 

2  Rymer,  vol.  i,  pp.  308,  316;  Mat.  Paris,  vol.  v,  p.  457. 

3  P.R.O.  R.  P.,  40  Hen.  Ill,  m.  9. 

4  P.R.O.  Royal  Letters,  etc.,  Chancery,  No.  2246;  Echard,  vol.  i,  p.  383. 
s  Mortier,  vol.  ii,  p.  508. 


102  Ube  Englisb  Dominicans 

other  non-believing  nations  in  the  East  and  North  " — thus  on 
i  May  1318  there  was  already  a  far-flung  battle  line  of  friars, 
dating  certainly  from  the  last  decade  of  the  thirteenth  century. 
Into  this  army  of  advance  the  English  Province  sent  some  of 
its  sons.  The  Royal  Patent  Rolls  of  13201  record  permission 
granted  to  Friars  Robert  of  Brayhook,  John  of  Stone,  Robert 
of  Atcomb,  for  safe  conducts  on  leaving  the  kingdom  to  preach 
to  the  Saracens,  and  in  the  same  year  Edward  II  gave  them 
letters  of  recommendation  to  the  King  of  Cyprus,  since  their 
visit  to  that  island  had  been  arranged  for  by  the  Master- 
General.2 

Just  about  that  very  year3  John,  an  English  Dominican  (is 
it  John  of  Stone,  the  sole  surviving  member  of  that  little 
band?  If  so,  then  ideas  must  have  been  so  vague  as  to  make 
Saracens  a  wide  term  for  all  Eastern  unbelievers !)  was  labour- 
ing with  Bartholomeo  of  Bologna  in  the  work  of  reconciling 
the  Armenians  to  the  Holy  See.  Here  their  work  was  mar- 
vellously successful.  Bartholomeo  and  John,  together  with 
another  John,  a  native  of  Florence,  set  to  work  to  learn 
Armenian  in  order  the  better  to  accomplish  their  mission. 
They  entered  into  friendly  relations  with  Abbot  John  of 
Cherna,  who  was  himself  desirous,  for  the  greater  spiritual 
profit  of  his  people,  to  unite  them  with  the  Latin  Church.  A 
meeting  of  Armenian  Abbots  from  the  Basilian  monasteries 
of  the  country  was  summoned  by  him,  and  after  much  theo- 
logical discussion  the  Papal  claims  were  accepted,  and  sub- 
mission to  the  Roman  See  guaranteed.  But  far  more  than 
this  was  done.  It  was  found  that  the  monasteries  had  lost 
their  earlier  fervour,  and  could  no  longer  act  as  centres  of 
spiritual  force  to  enlighten  and  to  inflame  the  people.  Hence 
the  whole  assembly  begged  to  be  admitted  to  the  Dominican 
Order.  As  a  commencement,  and  for  a  better  understanding 
of  what  might  follow,  the  friars,  Bartholomeo  of  Bologna  and 
John  of  England,  devoted  themselves  to  the  task  of  translat- ' 
ing  several  books  into  Armenian,  and  in  an  incredibly  short 
time  had  produced  the  Siunma  Contra  Gentes  of  Aquinas,  the 
Tertia  Pars  (dealing  with  the  Incarnation,  the  Sacraments, 
etc.)  of  his  Siimma  Theologica,  the  Summa  Conscientiae  (no 
doubt  of  S.  Raymund  Pennafort,  O.P.),  the  Psalter,  the  Rule 
of  S.  Augustine,  the  Constitutions  of  the  Friars  Preachers, 
the  Breviary  and  Missal  according  to  the  Dominican  rite. 
Within  three  years  the  whole  had  been  completed.  After 
much  further  discussion,  which  included  a  visit  of  John  of 
Cherna  to  Rome  in  1348,  the  whole  body  of  religious  in 
Armenia  became  organized  as  the  United  Friars  of  Armenia, 
subject  in  some  way  to  the  Dominican  Order,  requiring  the 
presence  of  a  Dominican  at  all  their  Provincial  Chapters,  and, 

1  P.R.O.  R.  C,  14  Edw.  II,  m.  22  dorso.  -  Ibid.,  m.  22  dorso. 

3  Mortier,  vol.  iii,  p.  321. 


Zbe  fl>reacbers  103 

with  some  modifications,  living"  the  full  Dominican  rule.  Indi- 
vidual poverty  they  did  not  observe,  nor  the  rigorous  absten- 
tion from  a  meat  diet,  and  the  colour  of  the  scapular  was 
black  instead  of  white.  This  changed  habit  is  identical  with 
that  of  the  lay  brothers  of  the  Order,  and  suggests  that  they 
did  not  become  priests,  but  remained  as  brothers,  after  the 
fashion  of  so  many  of  the  monks.  Between  1330  and  1348  all 
this  apparently  had  been  completely  arranged,  and  a  new 
branch  of  the  Dominican  Order  in  this  strange  fashion  put 
forth.  Even  in  1342  intercourse  between  the  Armenians  and 
the  West  had  so  far  progressed  that  the  English  royal 
accounts  mention  55s.  4^.  given  to  John  of  Armenia  and 
Stephen  of  the  Armenian  Province,  a  Friar  Preacher,  both  of 
whom  had  come  on  a  pilgrimage  to  the  shrine  of  S.  Thomas 
of  Canterbury.1  It  looks  as  though  this  recorded  a  visit  from 
Friar  John  of  England  (as  he  was  known  in  Armenia),  or  of 
Armenia  (as  he  was  known  in  England),  who  had  come  to 
take  care  of  John  of  Cherna  in  his  visit  to  the  West.  But  in 
the  early  days  of  this  wonderful  Armenian  conversion  there 
are  so  many  Johns  mentioned  that  it  is  exceedingly  hazardous 
to  identify,  with  any  certainty,  which  John  of  them  all  is  in  a 
particular  instance  referred  to.  In  any  case,  this  is  at  least 
additional  evidence  of  the  close  connection  between  the  English 
Province  and  the  Armenians.  By  1381  the  Turks  had  begun 
their  terrible  connection  with  that  almost  destroyed  people  by 
ravaging  the  whole  of  Armenia,  and  massacring,  as  they  have 
done  at  intervals  ever  since,  every  one  they  could  find. 
Monasteries  as  well  as  townships  went  down  in  the  terrible 
collapse,  and  the  United  Friars  appear  almost  to  have  ceased 
to  retain  any  corporate  existence.  Urban  VI  therefore 
allowed  a  number  of  them  to  join  the  Order  as  a  regular 
province,  not  simply  attached  to  the  friars  as  they  had  been, 
but  constituting,  like  any  other  province,  a  normal  group  in 
the  Dominican  organization. 

Another  scene  of  very  fruitful  missionary  enterprise  was  the 
country  grouped  round  Sultanyeh.2  Here,  in  the  Bull  of  1318 
already  referred  to,  a  hierarchy  was  set  up,  with  a  primate 
and  six  suffragans,  all  taken  from  the  Dominican  Order.  The 
actual  sees  were  not  specified  by  the  Pope,  though  the 
prelates  themselves  are  named.  Already,  of  course,  Chris- 
tianity had  been  preached  to  these  people,  and  they  had  a  fine 
tradition  of  thirteen  hundred  years.  But  heresy  and  ignorance 
and  the  political  effects  of  the  schism  had  kept  the  East 
isolated  from  Rome ;  it  was  to  re-unite  the  branch  to  its 
parent  stem  that  the  purpose  of  the  friars  was  turned.  From 
every  province  subjects  were  invited,  and  the  importance  of 

1  P.R.O.  Treasury  of  Recept.  Excheq.,  vol.  A^;  L.G.,  pp.  17-19  [15-18] 
Edw.  III. 

2  Mortier,  vol.  ii,  p.  509;  vol.  iii,  p.  321. 


104  XCbe  Bnglisb  Dominicans 

the  work  was  insisted  upon  by  several  General  Chapters, 
Sultanyeh  itself  is  described  as  possessing  twenty-five 
churches.  In  1403  an  English  friar,  William  Belets,1  was 
created  its  bishop  by  Boniface  IX  as  his  previous  choice,  the 
Dominican  Bishop  Nicholas  of  Ferrara,  refused  to  exchange 
his  own  diocese  for  one  so  far  afield.  It  does  not  appear,  how- 
ever, that  even  Belets  went  to  his  distant  see.  Up  till  the 
middle  of  the  fifteenth  century  the  bishops  of  Sultanyeh  were 
all  chosen  from  among  the  Friars  Preachers;  in  1423  one  of 
the  United  Friars  of  Armenia  was  wisely  selected  for  the  office, 
thus  securing  and  soothing  national  feeling.  But  then  came 
the  new  fury  of  the  Turk,  and  the  relations  of  East  and  West 
grew  rarer  because  less  possible.  Even  on  the  western  borders 
of  the  Black  Sea  the  white  habit,  with  its  black  mantle,  was  to 
be  found,  and  the  English  speech  of  that  wonderful  age  could 
have  been  heard.  Once  again  it  was  John  XXII  who  was  the 
main  mover  of  the  enterprise.  The  Franciscans  were  sent  to 
Pekin,  and  their  friars  established  by  Pope  John  "in  far 
Cathay"  in  a  regular  hierarchy  of  prelates.  But  the  inhospit- 
able Crimea  was  chosen  for  the  children  of  S.  Dominic.  Here 
again  the  English  Province  sent  adventurous  souls  on  the 
quest  of  God. a  In  1328  Francis  of  Camerino  and  Richard  of 
England  received  to  the  faith  Millemi,  Prince  of  the  Alanis, 
and  Versacht,  King  of  the  Ziques,  and  were  despatched  to 
Rome  to  settle  the  terms  of  the  union  and  to  obtain  more 
missionaries  to  work  among  the  tribes  which  now  so  strongly 
desired  to  be  linked  up  with  the  Western  Church.  Crossing 
the  lone  regions  north  of  the  Black  Sea  the  two  missionaries 
passed  through  the  fringe  of  the  Byzantine  Empire  and  came 
to  Constantinople  on  their  return.  Here,  made  hopeful  by 
their  successful  labours  farther  east,  they  endeavoured  to 
bring  the  Emperor  Andronicus  III  into  the  same  State  of 
union.  For  its  own  ends  the  Greek  Court  affected  to  be 
sympathetic  to  the  desires  of  the  two  friars,  and  sent  warm 
greetings  to  the  Papacy.  Cheered  by  this,  and  perhaps  in 
their  eagerness  rather  exaggerating  the  prospects  of  re-union, 
the  missionaries  arrived  in  Rome,  and  were  gladly  received 
by  Pope  John  XXII.  His  apostolic  spirit  caught  here  another 
vision,  and  as  he  had  so  frequently  blessed  and  despatched 
to  Eastern  peoples  the  Preaching  Friars,  so  once  again  he 
addressed  (22  May  1332)3  a  letter  to  the  Master-General  and 
Chapter  then  sitting  at  Dijon,  exhorting  them  to  send  more 
labourers  to  the  vineyard.  The  Chapter  demanded  reinforce- 
ments from  the  provinces,  and  determined  to  set  up  priories 
where  the  Eastern  languages  might  be  learnt  and  missionaries 
trained  scientifically  for  their  work.    To  help  on  and  establish 

1  Bullarium,  vol.  iii,  p.  454. 

2  Eubel,  Hierarchia  Cat.  Med.  JEvi,  vol.  i,  p.  190. 

3  Acta  Gen.  Cap.,  vol.  ii,  p.  220. 


Ube  preacbers  105 

more  firmly  the  newly  born  Church,  Pope  John  himself  con- 
secrated Francis  and  Richard,  nominating-  the  Italian  Arch- 
bishop of  Vospero  and  the  Englishman  Bishop  of  the 
Chersonese,  and  suggesting  that  the  two  cathedrals  should 
be  dedicated  to  S.  Michael  and  S.  Clement.  Evidently  the 
prelates  at  once  set  off  on  their  journey,  taking  with  them 
commendatory  letters  from  the  Pope,  who  praised  their  zeal 
and  stimulated  their  fervour,  for  copies  of  these  letters,  dated 
the  Feast  of  S.  Dominic  that  year,  are  to  be  found  in  the 
Dominican  Bullarium ;  but  the  future  fate  of  the  two  is  lost. 
Friar  Richard  of  England,  like  Friar  John  of  Armenia,  has 
"left  little  record  of  his  doings.  Here  and  there  in  Bulls  and 
Chapter  Records,  and  fragmentary  accounts  from  Royal 
Alms  Books,  are  to  be  found  references  to  one  or  other  of 
these  missionaries,  who  fared  forth  from  these  islands  on  the 
quest  of  God ;  but  the  full  story  of  their  work  was  not  told, 
or  kept,  or  even  known  on  this  side  of  their  "sundering  seas." 
The  Crusades  had  failed  one  by  one  to  restore  by  force  of 
arms  the  Sepulchre  of  Christ;  even  this  nobler  ideal  of  con- 
verting the  whole  of  the  East,  and  bringing  all  back  to  the 
Faith,  came  no  nearer  to  accomplishment.  But  the  vision  of 
it  was  seen,  and  the  effort  heroically  made,  to  establish  as 
actual  fact  that  dream  of  many  souls. 

Here  then  in  England,  by  preaching  and  by  pen,  the 
attempt  was  made  to  explain  the  Creed  according  to  the 
capacity  of  the  hearers  of  the  Gospel.  The  names  of  Wallace 
and  Bromyard  and  Gorham  stand  in  the  first  line  of  mediaeval 
preachers  in  England ;  in  the  arts  shines  almost  solitary  the 
figure  of  John  Cifrewas;  in  science  we  hear  of  John  of  S.  Giles 
in  medicine,  of  Kilwardby  in  philosophy,  of  Hotham  and 
Claypole  in  theology,  of  Trivet  in  history.  Across  the  seas 
pass  the  half-remembered  forms,  ghostly  in  the  unsubstantial 
figures  that  they  show,  of  John  and  Richard,  of  Belets,  and 
Robert  of  Brayhook  and  Robert  of  Atcomb.  But  the  clamour 
of  the  pulpit  and  the  schools  has  died  down  into  silence,  and 
death  has  made  dumb  the  most  eloquent  of  lips.  A  stillness 
holds  those  broken  records  of  the  past.  Perhaps  future 
labours  may  lay  bare  many  details  now  buried,  but  the  prob- 
ability is  that,  as  they  would  all  best  have  wished,  all,  except 
the  coloured  miniatures  of  Cifrewas  and  the  as  vivid  minia- 
tures of  Trivet,  everything  is  forgotten  and  unknown. 

Wisely  does  Rhetoric  in  Simon  Memmi's  fresco  in  the 
Dominican  Church  of  S.  Maria  Novella  alone  of  all  the 
sciences  hold  a  scroll  in  perfect  quietness,  making  no  move- 
ment with  the  hands.  A  trumpet  would  have  suggested 
greater  noise,  but  the  text  of  the  scroll  suggests  that  it  is 
the  silent  lips  taught  of  God  alone  which  gives  strength : 

Mulceo  dum  loquor,  varios  indulta  colores. 


CHAPTER  VI 
ROYAL  CONFESSORS 

BESIDES  their  work  as  teachers  and  preachers,  the 
sons  of  S.  Dominic  took  another  prominent  part 
in  the  national  life.  For  one  hundred  and  forty- 
four  years,  without  intermission,  they  were  the 
confessors  of  our  English  kings.  The  house  of 
Plantagenet,  from  its  third  generation  to  its  sad  end,  was 
guided  in  its  spiritual  life  by  the  disciples  of  S.  Thomas  of 
Aquin.  Of  course,  the  Curia  Regis  was  already  graced  by 
an  official  "Keeper  of  the  King's  conscience,"  who  eventually 
became  the  Lord  Chancellor,  and  from  whom  developed  the 
whole  judicial  system  of  equity ;  but  even  as  early  as  the 
reign  of  Henry  II  this  functionary  had  ceased  to  have  any 
spiritual  connection  with  his  royal  master,  so  that  there  was 
plenty  of  scope  left  to  these  friars  to  endeavour  to  keep  watch 
and  ward  over  this  fiercest,  most  lawless,  yet  noblest  race  of 
the  English  blood  royal.  When  the  house  of  Lancaster  suc- 
ceeded on  the  deposition  of  Richard  II  it  transferred  its 
spiritual  trust  to  the  care  of  the  Carmelite  friars.  The 
Dominicans  were  considered  too  much  attached  to  the  older 
line  of  kings.  However,  eventually,  Henry  IV  went  back  to 
the  Friars  Preachers,  as  also  did  his  grandson,  Henry  VI. 
The  house  of  York  does  not  seem  to  have  patronized  any 
particular  religious  order  to  guide  its  easily  running  con- 
science, though  two  of  Edward's  children,  George,  Duke  of 
Bedford,  who  died  in  infancy,  and  Richard,  Duke  of  York, 
one  of  the  murdered  children  of  the  Tower, 

The  most  replenished  sweet  work  of  nature 
That  from  the  prime  creation  e'er  she  framed, 

were  born  in  the  Dominican  Priory  of  Shrewsbury.  Fortu- 
nately, the  Black  Friars  were  spared  the  adventurous  and 
intricate  task  of  soothing  the  scruples  of  "  bluff  King  Hal," 
though  one  of  their  number,  Geoffrey  Athequa,  as  confessor 
to  Catherine  of  Aragon,  consoled  and  strengthened  that  most 
injured  Queen.1  Princess  Mary  followed  her  mother  in  the 
choice  of  her  director,  selecting  Friar  John  Hopton,  O.P. , 
whom  she  promoted  later  to  the  bishopric  of  Norwich.  Then, 
too,  the  hapless  Mary  Queen  of  Scots,  whose  character  is  one 
of  the  moot  points  of  history,  had  a  Dominican  confessor  in 
Roche  Mamerot.  Nicholas  Gorham,  whose  name  has  appeared 
among  the  list  of  famous  preachers  of  the  English  Province, 
went  oversea  as  confessor  to  King  Philip  of  France,  while  a 
Dominican  from  Italy  was  chaplain  to  Queen  Margaret  of 
Anjou  till  all  her  hopes  were  lost  and  her  royalty  almost 
renounced.    Finally,  the  wife  of  Charles  II,  Queen  Catherine  of 

1  Letters  and  Papers,   Foreign  and  Domestic,  of  Henry  VIII,  vol.  vii, 
p.  717,  etc. 

106 


IRopal  Confessors  107 

Braganza,  chose  as  her  chaplain  Friar  Thomas  Howard,  O.P., 
subsequently  the  Cardinal  of  Norfolk,  the  reorganizer  in  post- 
Reformation  days  of  the  English  Province  of  S.  Dominic. 

No  doubt  the  reason  for  this  constant  and  consistent 
choice  lay  in  the  fact  that  this  Order  was  in  an  especial  way 
famed  for  its  knowledge  of  theology : 

For  some  given  are  to  chivalry, 
Some  to  riot  and  ribaldry, 
But  friars  are  given  to  great  study, 
And  to  great  prayers. 

Probably  this  verse  is  meant  satirically,  but  its  irony 
springs  from  the  popular  notion  that  it  represented  truth. 
In  fact,  these  Dominican  confessors  of  royalty  have  left  a 
number  of  manuscript  works  on  every  conceivable  subject  of 
mediaeval  learning.  John  of  Darlington  helped  in  the  Great 
Concordance  of  the  sacred  Scriptures;1  Walter  de  Winter- 
bourne2  wrote  many  treatises,  amongst  others,  a  famous  De 
Peccato  Originate  \  Luke  of  Woodford  was  an  Oxford  pro- 
fessor;3 John  of  Woodrowe  held  a  chair  of  theology  at 
Cambridge;4  John  of  Wrotham  was  declared  by  his  royal 
penitent  in  1320  to  be  a  fluent  speaker  in  French,  Irish, 
Welsh,  and  Scotch,  as  well  as  a  pastmaster  in  his  native 
English;1  Thomas  Rushook  was  the  first  to  be  asked  to 
address  the  famous  Westminster  Council  of  1374.  The 
conduct  of  Rushook  at  this  council  shows  that  Dominican 
theology  was  certainly  cautious  and  not  inclined  to  dogmatize 
or  pronounce  ex  cathedra  decisions,  even  in  the  midst  of 
reverend  and  learned  theologians.  The  question  to  be  dis- 
cussed in  the  council  was  sufficiently  thorny  to  have  incon- 
veniently perplexed  the  most  wary  of  doctors.  It  was  as  to 
the  exact  meaning  of  the  Pope's  dominion  over  ecclesiastical 
temporalities  and  his  feudatory  claim  to  England.  On  a  bench 
in  front  of  the  Prince  of  Wales  (the  Black  Prince)  and  the 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury  (William  of  Witlesey)  sat  Rushook 
with  three  other  masters  of  theology.  The  Dominicans  had 
already  a  century  earlier,  at  a  previous  public  gathering, 
declared  their  principles,  so  that  one  can  imagine  how  all 
eyes  were  turned  to  the  provincial  of  the  Friar  Preachers  to 
see  if  he  dared  in  the  presence  of  the  archbishop  and  bishops 
defend  the  expediency  of  advocating  the  popular  and  royal 
cause,  even  while  admitting  the  Papal  claims.  Rushook  was 
the  first  called  upon  to  deliver  his  opinion.  He  rose  to  reply. 
In  the  still  silence  of  the  council  room  he  began  by  exposing 
the  difficulty  of  his  position.  Then  as  the  prelates  listened 
eagerly  for  his  answer,  he  gave  them  with  great  eloquence 
no  answer  at  all ;   but   told    them  it  was  the  custom  of  his 

1  Antiquary,  1890,  p.  115.  2  Ibid.,  p.  116. 

3  Ibid.,  p.  119.  *  Ibid.,  p.  263.  5  Ibid.,  p.  265. 


io8  Zhe  Encjltsb  ^Dominicans 

Order  to  begin  every  arduous  and  intricate  discussion  by 
singing-  a  votive  Mass  in  honour  of  the  Holy  Ghost  or  at 
least  the  Vein  Creator  Spiritus.  Until  such  had  been  done  he 
felt  himself  unable  to  come  to  any  sure  and  definite  judgement. 
Then  he  sat  down,  leaving  the  question  exactly  as  he  had 
found  it.  The  council  continued  in  debate  two  days.  The 
Black  Prince  made  a  very  military  oration,  calling  the  bishops 
asses;  eventually  a  majority  of  the  theologians  were  induced 
to  vote  for  the  royal  cause.  It  is  clear  that  Rushook  was 
himself  inclined  to  the  King's  party,  for  some  years  later  he  was 
accused  of  browbeating  the  judges  into  their  famous  decision 
at  Nottingham,  21  August  1387,  whereby  the  royal  authority 
over  Parliament  in  its  commissions  of  reform,  order  of  busi- 
ness, dissolution,  and  impeachment  was  decided  to  be  abso- 
lute. Impeached  himself  in  the  Merciless  Parliament  of  1388, 
and  condemned  by  his  peers,  Bishop  Rushook  (he  had  been 
consecrated  to  Llandaff  in  1383,  translated  to  Chichester  in 
^85)  was  banished  to  Ireland,  where  he  died  of  grief  in 
1393.  Though  in  Ireland  he  had  become  Bishop  of  Kilmore, 
he  could  not  rest  there  even  in  the  grave,  and  now  lies  buried 
in  the  parish  church  of  Seale,  in  Kent.1 

But  the  life  of  a  courtier  was  naturally  difficult  to  reconcile 
with  the  life  of  a  begging  friar.  The  strict  regulations  of 
monastic  discipline  had  to  be  modified  to  a  certain  extent  to 
allow  the  Dominicans  to  perform  their  confessorial  work. 
Thus  as  early  as  1250  there  is  a  bull  of  Pope  Innocent  IV  to 
King  Henry  III  giving  permission  to  the  friars  to  relax  their 
rule  so  far  as  to  ride  on  horseback:  "  Graciously  assenting  to 
the  request  of  your  Highness,  We  hereby  grant  that  such 
friars  as  are  about  you  may  ride  on  horseback  as  often  as  you 
may  desire  it."2  Then  again  in  1321,  on  8  October,  the  King, 
the  ill-fated  Edward  II,  wrote  from  Porchester  to  Pope 
John  XXII  for  leave  to  allow  the  royal  confessor,  Robert  of 
Duffield,  to  converse  at  table.3  He  asked  further  that  Friar 
Robert  might  also  use  the  privilege  (then  as  now  granted 
only  to  royalty  and  bishops)  of  giving  licence  to  his 
Dominican  brethren  also  to  talk  during  the  community  meal- 
time. This  should  not,  however,  in  any  way  be  taken  to 
imply  that  the  friars  at  Court  fell  into  lax  ways.  The  fact 
that  a  very  large  number  of  them  had  previously  held  the 
provincialate  shows  that  they  were  to  be  counted  among  the 
most  zealous  of  their  Order;  and  the  very  asking  for  papal 
dispensations  from  the  perpetual  silence  and  from  foot 
journeyings  tends  to  prove  that  up  to  that  time  the  constitu- 
tions of  their  rule  had  been  rigorously  enforced. 

Sometimes,  indeed,  the  double  set  of  ties,  to  Order  and  to 
Court,  did  make  it  difficult  for  a  friar  to  fulfil  his  duty;  but 

1  Antiquary,  1890,  pp.  265,  266.  2  Bull.,  vol.  vii,  p.  24. 

3  P.R.O.  Rot.  Rom.  et  Franc,  15-1S  Edw.  II,  m.  13  dorse 


1Ro£al  Confessors  109 

in  almost  every  case  compromise  was  not  allowed  to  infringe 
upon  the  obligations  of  religious  life.  Already  we  have  called 
attention  to  the  despatch  of  Hotham  to  Rome  on  a  royal 
embassy  to  the  Pope,  in  order  that  a  distasteful  decree  of  a 
General  Chapter,  assigning  him  to  teach  in  a  foreign  house 
of  studies,  might  be  carefully  ignored ;  but  the  implication  of 
the  Pope  in  the  manoeuvre  preserves  the  friar  from  blame.  In 
1265  Henry  III  patiently  petitioned  Kilwardby,  the  actual 
Provincial,  to  allow  John  of  Darlington  to  return  to  Court.1 
No  command  was  expressed,  but  only  a  pathetic  appeal,  for 
since  John  had  been  of  such  help  in  the  past,  the  King  felt 
sure  that  "in  these  distressful  times  "  (de  Montfort  had  just 
been  defeated  and  slain  at  Evesham)  he  would  be  helpful 
again.  That  he  was  helpful  Matthew  Paris  abundantly  and 
expressly  testified. 2  Again,  the  letters  that  passed  between 
Edward  I  and  Thomas  Jorz,  the  English  Dominican  Cardinal, 
while  establishing  beyond  doubt  that  Jorz's  promotion  was 
due  to  Edward's  direct  intervention,  shows  also  that  no 
advantage  of  this  was  taken  by  the  King  to  procure  favours 
from  Rome.  It  is  true  that  the  Cardinal's  aid  was  asked  to 
secure  the  see  of  S.  Andrew's  for  William  Comyn  of  Buchan, 
and  that  of  Glasgow  for  Geoffrey  of  Mowbray,  and  it  is 
obvious  that  Jorz  was  staying  designedly  outside  Paris,  in  the 
manor  of  Hugh  le  Despenser,  when  that  cunning  diplomat 
was  negotiating  with  Clement  V  the  absolution  of  Edward  I 
from  his  oaths  to  his  people;  but  the  chief  things  they  dis- 
cussed in  these  letters  were  the  sad  destruction  of  the  Car- 
dinal's effects  in  a  fire  at  Bordeaux,  which  Edward  hoped 
shortly  himself  to  make  good,  and  the  return  to  health  of  both 
correspondents.  The  King  especially  wished  the  Cardinal  "a 
long  and  jolly  "  (jacundiis)  life.3  Edward  III  was  rather  more 
headstrong.  Richard  of  Wynkley,  his  confessor,  who  had 
been  engaged  on  the  King's  affairs,  which  were  in  no  sense 
whatever  unlawful  or  unworthy,  had  been  suddenly  removed 
from  his  office  by  the  Master-General.  To  Master  Hugh, 
therefore,  on  20  April  1340,  Edward  addressed  a  furious 
epistle.4  He  expressed  his  astonishment  at  what  had  been 
done,  since  he  took  it  for  granted  that  one  so  highly  placed 
as  the  Master-General  must  be  a  very  model  of  prudence. 
The  only  people  likely  to  be  pleased  at  the  affront  were  the 
King's  enemies,  a  fact  all  the  more  monstrous  and  ungrateful 
considering  how  much  had  been  done  by  his  royal  house  for 
the   "beloved  Order  of    Preachers."    Indeed,    so    irate  was 

1  P.  R.O.    Surrender,    Exchequer    Court    of   Augmentations,    Thetford 
Blackfriars,  No.  239. 

2  Mat.  Paris,  vol.  v,  p.  549. 

3  P.R.O.  R.  C,  34Edw.  I,  m.  16;  R.  P.,  2  Edw.  II,  p.  1,  m.  12;  Royal 
Letters  {Chancery),  Nos.  2226,  2227,  3122. 

*  P.R.O.  R.  C.,  14  Edw.  Ill,  p.  1,  m.  27  dorso. 


1 10  Ube  Bnglisb  Bominicaus 

Edward  that  he  appealed  to  the  General  Chapter  to  reverse 
the  sentence  of  the  Master.  Yet  even  by  so  doing-  he  showed 
his  respect  for  the  constitutional  practices  of  the  Order. 

After  the  bull  of  1250  above  recorded,  it  is  noticeable  how 
largely  the  horse  enters  at  once  into  the  life  of  the  court 
confessor.  The  proof  of  this  is  to  be  found  in  the  royal 
account  books,  which  still  remain  to  show  the  habits  of  life  of 
the  King's  household.  Most  of  the  documents  can  be  found 
in  the  Book  of  the  Wardrobe,  the  Alms  Rolls,  and  the  Ex- 
chequer Rolls.  Some  have  already  been  printed  by  order  of 
Parliament,  others  still  lie  curled  and  crabbed  and  dog-eared 
in  the  Public  Record  Office.  Dry  as  their  contents  seem,  there 
is  yet  much  interesting  matter  to  be  extracted  from  them  by 
patient  study.  From  them  we  gather  that  a  considerable  trade 
in  horses  was  then  occupying  English  minds,  though  the 
prices  were  extremely  curious  and  varied  enormously.  That 
there  should  have  been  a  considerable  rise  in  price  after  the 
Black  Death  was  to  have  been  expected,  since  labour,  ren- 
dered thereby  much  more  scarce,  could  demand  in  consequence 
a  higher  wage,  but  the  extraordinary  fluctuations  in  trade, 
revealed  in  these  ledgers,  cannot  wholly  be  explained  even  by 
the  Black  Death.  Nor  again  can  they  be  ascribed  to  the  busi- 
ness capacity  of  individual  confessors,  their  skill  in  bargain- 
ing, though  no  doubt  something  may  be  due  to  this ;  nor  even 
to  the  breed  or  pedigree  of  the  charger  in  question.  Thus  in 
1256  three  palfreys  with  their  saddles  cost  ;£n  16^,  <\d.  ,T 
while  in  1306  two  palfreys  alone  cost  ^19  6.?.  8d.2  It  is,  indeed, 
an  economic  truism  that  as  the  amount  of  specie  in  circula- 
tion increases,  the  purchasing  power  of  money  is  bound  to 
lessen,  and  that  consequently  prices  (i.e.,  nominal  prices)  will 
tend  to  grow  higher  from  age  to  age.  But  then  why  does  a 
bay  horse  in  1312  cost  £6  13^.  qd.,3  and  in  1320  ^4  13.S.  4*/.  ?4 
Sometimes  the  fluctuations  are  even  more  ridiculous,  and 
make  one  wonder  what  sort  of  an  animal  was  obtained  at  the 
end  of  all  the  bargaining.  For  example,  in  1306  a  sumpter- 
horse  cost  £8.5  Taking  into  consideration  the  difference  in 
the  value  of  money  then  and  now,  the  price  seems  perfectly 
reasonable,  But  what  could  the  sumpter-horse  be  like  that  in 
1342  fetched  only  46^.  8d.  ?  6 

Occasionally  the  name  of  the  seller  of  the  animal  is  given. 
Perhaps  this  was  meant  as  a  kind  of  voucher  to  the  ex- 
chequer officials  that  the  palfrey  came  from  a  famous  stud, 
as  one  might  note  an  Arab  steed  from  Crabbet  Park.     Says 

1  P.R.O.  R.  deL.,  40  Hen.  Ill,  m.  11. 

2  P.R.O.  R.  E.  S.  Pasch.,  34  Edw.  I,  m.  3. 

3  P.R.O.  Liber  Codidianus  Thes.,  anno  6°  Edw.  II. 

4  Brit.  Mus.  Add.  MSS.,  17362;  L.  G.,  anno  13  Edw.  II. 
3  P.R.O.  Liber  de  Hospicio  R.,  34  Edw.  I. 

6  P.R.O.  R.  Rom.,  16  Edw.  Ill,  m.  2. 


IRo^al  Confessors  1 1 1 

Chaucer  in  the  Squire's  Tale,  talking  of  the  renowned  Apulian 
breed : 

Therewith  so  horsly  and  so  quick  of  eye, 

As  it  a  gentil  Poiteis  courser  were. 

On  one  occasion  a  Dominican  royal  confessor  tried  to  do  a 
little  business  of  his  own.  In  1300  Walter  de  Winterbourne 
(who  was  later  to  be  created  Cardinal,  and,  though  dying  in 
Genoa,  was  buried  in  the  Blackfriars  in  London)  sold  a  black 
horse  for  £^.1  But  he  rather  lost  over  the  ensuing  transac- 
tion, for  the  dappled  mare  that  he  purchased  in  exchange  cost 
him  £6  135.  <\d.2  The  royal  account  was  therefore  debited 
jQz  13s.  /\d.  No  wonder  Edward  I  ended  his  life  on  the  verge 
of  bankruptcy. 

Parallel  with  these  entries  about  horse  buying  are  items  for 
saddles  and  bridles.  There  is  even  one  bill  extant  for  twenty- 
four  horseshoes  and  a  hundred  nails,  though  this  must  have 
been  a  perpetually  recurring  expense,  for  the  horses  were 
really  well  cared  for.3  Thus  Walter  de  Winterbourne  spent  at 
Berwick  18s.  nd.  on  a  tent  for  them  to  be  kept  in,  besides 
some  smaller  sums  laid  out  on  cord,  string,  barrels,  axes, 
etc.,  presumably  to  fit  up  this  temporary  stable.4 

The  reason  for  all  these  equestrian  accounts  is  that  the 
King's  confessor  was  expected  to  act  as  ambassador  for  his 
royal  master  whenever  occasion  required.  The  bull  of  Inno- 
cent IV,  giving  the  friars  permission  to  ride  on  horseback, 
supposed  this,  and  these  royal  accounts  show  that  there  was 
no  intention  of  allowing  this  papal  privilege  to  fall  into  abey- 
ance. John  of  Darlington,  the  first  Dominican  nominated  to 
be  royal  confessor,  had  many  journeys  to  make.  There  are 
records  of  several  excursions  to  Rome  on  the  royal  affairs.5 
Besides  this,  Friar  John  belonged  to  the  King's  party  in  the 
Elective  Council  of  twenty-four  nominated  in  the  Provisions 
of  Oxford  (Stubbs,  Selected  Charters,  p.  388).  This,  however, 
proved  abortive,  and  never  came  into  actual  existence.  Con- 
sequently he  was  saved  a  good  deal  of  time.  During  the 
incessant  French  wars,  too,  many  a  confessor  went  back- 
,  wards  and  forwards,  trying  to  arrange  treaties  and  truces 
'  that  were  no  sooner  made  than  broken.  Again,  on  29  Dec- 
ember 1255,  Roger  of  Chester  was  said  to  be  far  too  ill  to 
travel  on  the  King's  affairs  to  Scotland,  so  that  the  Dominican 
provincial  was  asked  to  substitute  another  in  his  stead,6  and  in 
the  July  of  the  same  year,  Henry  III  chose  Gilbert  of  Battle 
and  Roger  of  Refham  to  go  to  Sweden  and  negociate.7 

1  Liber  Ouotidianus  C.  G.  (Society  of  Antiquaries,  1787),  p.  79. 

2  Ibid.,  p.  6.  3  Antiquary,  1890,  p.  117. 
4  Ibid.,  p.  117.  5  Ibid.,  p.  115. 

G  P.R.O.  R.  C,  40  Hen.  Ill,  m.  18  dorso. 

7  P.R.O.  R.  P.,  39  Hen.  Ill,  m.  5;  R.  C,  39  Hen.  Ill,  p.  1,  m.  1  dorso; 
Rymer,  vol.  i,  p.  325. 


1 1 2  ube  EngUsfo  Dominicans 

The  Duke  of  Sweden  himself  had  also  sent  to  Henry  two 
Dominicans,  entered  as  Bert  and  Commerus,  who  are  evi- 
dently remnants  of  S.  Hyacinth's  band  of  preachers,  and 
whose  Scandinavian  names  defied  all  the  efforts  of  the  royal 
officials  to  spell.  To  Hungary  in  1346  Edward  III  sent  Walter 
Atmore.1  From  the  Scottish  King-  in  1264  came  Miles  of 
Stratheam  and  Simon  de  la  Fountayne,  both  Dominican 
friars,  to  treat  with  Henry;2  in  1265,  overseas  Ralph  de 
Nevers  and  John  Le  Verrer  returned  home  on  embassy;3  in 
1 277  Andrew  Pentechost  and  John  Savernake  cross  the  channel 
on  the  King's  affairs.4  Indeed,  in  1277  William  of  South- 
ampton, the  English  provincial,0  actually  made  peace  between 
Henry  III  and  Prince  Llewellyn  of  Wales,  and,  on  behalf  of 
the  latter,  Friar  Llewellyn  and  his  socius  go  down  back 
again  into  Wales.6  From  Cyprus7  the  royal  ambassadors  in 
1301  were  Dominicans,  as  also  from  Aragon,  1342, 8  from 
Gascony  in  1338,9  from  Brittany  in  1362,10  from  Flanders  in 
1373, u  from  Brabant  in  1303. 1S  In  1297  John  of  Wrotham  and 
William  of  Pickering  by  the  King's  command  went  to 
Damme ; 13  and  earlier  in  the  same  year  6s.  8d.  was  paid  by 
royal  command  to  Friar  Gregory  of  Wales  and  his  companion 
for  going  with  forty  soldiers  from  Wales  to  Winchelsea,  so  as 
to  cross  over  to  Flanders  with  the  King.14  Again  it  was  a 
Dominican  from  Scotland,  Adam  of  Lanark,  who  visited 
David  Bruce  in  his  prison,  and  no  doubt  arranged  for  the 
treaty  whereby  that  prince  engaged  in  the  Dominican  priory 
of  Newcastle  on  Tyne  to  pay  ransom  for  his  freedom.10  By  a 
Dominican,  Edward  II  wrote  to  the  Pope  and  to  Cardinal  Jorz 
on  behalf  of  Frederick,  the  son  of  Manfred,  making  a  touching 
and  chivalrous  appeal  for  mercy,  "  lest  the  son  of  so  great  a 
monarch  should  come  to  want."16 

In  1340^30  was  given  to  Richard  of  Winckley,  going  to 
the  Roman  court  on  "secret  and  arduous  affairs  touching 
the  King";17  in  1354  200  marks  go  to  John  Woodruff,  O.P.,. 

1  P.R.O.  E.  S.  Mich.,  20  Edw.  Ill,  m.  40. 

2  P.R.O.  R.  P.,  21  Hen.  Ill,  m.  20. 

3  Ibid.,  3  Edw.  II,  m.  16. 

4  Ibid.,  5  Edw.  I,  m.  21. 

5  P.R.O.  Liber  A.    Thes.  R.  S.,  fol.  378,  407b. 

6  P.R.O.  R.  P.,  5  Edw.  I,  m.  21. 

7  P.R.O./.  G.,  24  March,  24  Edw.  I. 

8  P.R.O.  R.  R.,  16  Edw.  Ill,  m.  3. 

9  P.R.O.  R.  R.  and  P.,  17  Edw.  Ill,  m.  4;  R.  E.  S.  Mich.  18  Edw.  III., 
m.  1  ;  ibid.,  17  Edw.  Ill,  m.  14. 

10  P.R.O.  R.  E.  S.  Mich.,  36  Edw.  Ill,  m.  44. 

11  Ibid. ,  47  Edw.  Ill,  m.  13. 

12  P.R.O.  Liber  P.  de  Abytone,  C.  G.  Princip.  Walliae,  31  Edw.  I. 

13  Brit.  Mus.  Add.  MSS.,  7695;  L.  G.  Necess.,  25  Edw.  I. 

14  Ibid.,  L.  G.  Eles.,  25  Edw.  I. 

15  P.R.O.  R.  Scac,  30  Edw.  Ill,  m.  1. 

16  P.R.O.  R.  R.  and  P.,  1-3  Edw.  II,  m.  7. 

17  P.R.O.  R.  E.  S.,  Mich.,  15  Edw.  Ill,  m.  5,  7. 


1Ro£a I  Confessors  113 

for  his  expenses  in  going-  to  the  Roman  Court  "to  treat  of 
concord  between  Our  Lord  the  King  and  those  of  France  " ; 1 
m  J337  Winckley  deliberated  with  other  ambassadors  on  a 
firm  peace  between  Edward  III  and  the  kings  of  France  and 
Scotland.2  All  these  failed  to  bring  about  any  settlement  of 
difficulties;  war  was  declared,  which  lasted  more  or  less  con- 
tinually for  over  a  hundred  years.  On  15  March  1346,  Edward 
wrote  to  the  provincial  to  explain  his  reasons  for  going  to 
war  with  France,  and  he  begged  the  provincial  to  acquaint 
his  friars  with  the  true  state  of  affairs.3  This  primitive  "  blue- 
book  "  narrates  the  causes  and  motives  for  Edward's  declara- 
tion and  challenge,  and  the  King  especially  desired  that  its 
contents  should  be  explained  from  every  pulpit  occupied  by 
the  Dominicans,  so  as  effectually  "to  close  the  mouths  of 
those  English  who  opposed  the  war."  Even  earlier,  this  use 
of  the  Preacher  Friars  in  propaganda  work  for  the  royal 
policy  was  evidenced  in  1315,  for  the  Archbishop  of  York 
wrote  on  14  January  to  the  Prior  of  York,  bidding  him  enjoin 
on  all  his  brethren  (and  especially  the  Prior  of  Yarm)  to 
preach  against  the  Scots  who  had  been  doing  "  such  horrible 
things  against  Church,  King,  and  country."4  Even  the  pre- 
sence of  aliens  within  prohibited  areas  came  under  the  notice 
of  this  efficient  mediaeval  government,  for  the  provincial  was 
commanded  on  10  August  1333  to  change  all  the  friars  within 
the  royal  borough  of  Berwick  by  substituting  English  for 
Scotch  Dominicans,  and  dispersing  the  Scotch  among  the 
priories  south  of  the  Trent.5  War  news,  too,  was  officially 
sent  them,  for  Edward  in  1346,  writing  to  the  Dominican 
Prior  of  London  to  ask  for  prayers  for  the  success  of  English 
arms,  speaks  of  the  Earl  of  Lancaster's  victories  and  the 
enveloping  movement  of  the  French.6 

But  besides  acting  as  foreign  ambassadors,  these  Do- 
minicans were  engaged  on  the  royal  service  in  home  politics. 
As  early  as  1233,  on  10  April,  they,  together  with  Francis- 
cans, accompanied  the  Archbishop  Elect  of  Canterbury,  and 
some  bishops  in  their  successful  "  conversations  "  to  heal  the 
breach  between  the  King  and  his  great  regent,  William 
Marshal.7  Again,  with  the  Franciscans  in  1264,  on  the  day 
of  the  battle  of  Lewes,  by  their  mediation,  Prince  Edward,  the 
son  of  Henry  III,  and  Prince  Henry,  the  son  of  the  King's 
brother,  Richard  of  Cornwall,  King  of  the  Romans,  treated 
peacefully   with    Simon    de    Montfort.8     A   mysterious  com- 

1  P.R.O.  L.  G.  R.,  27  Edw.  III. 

2  P.R.O.  R.  Aleman,  2  Edw.  Ill,  m.  2;  Rot.  Scac,  11  Edw.  Ill,  m.  6. 

3  P.R  O.  R.  C,  20  Edw.  Ill,  m.  16  dorso. 

4  Raine,  Historical  Letters  and  Papers,  p.  238. 

5  P.R.O.  R.  Scac,  7  Edw.  Ill,  m.  14  dorso. 

6  P.R.O.  R.  C,  20  Edw.  Ill,  m.  16  dorso. 

7  Annates  Tewkesbury,  vol.  i,  p.  92. 

8  Walsing-ham,  Ypodigma  Neustriae,  p.  154. 

I 


1 14  XTbe  Bnglisb  Dominicans 

munication,  dated  1  March  1260,  still  remains  in  official  copy, 
whereby  Henry  III  replies  to  some  letters  of  Prince  Edward 
which  had  come  to  him  by  the  hand  of  Friar  John  of  Darling- 
ton.1 The  King  related  in  his  answer  that  he  had  spoken 
three  times  to  the  friar  about  the  matter,  and  was  exceed- 
ingly glad  about  it;  but  no  hint  is  given,  undoubtedly  of  set 
purpose,  as  to  what  this  matter  might  be.  Any  way,  it  cer- 
tainly bore  reference  to  the  political  unrest  of  that  date,  since 
Henry  said  he  would  send  some  of  his  "people  to  parts  of 
England  to  see  if  deeds  correspond  to  words."  At  another 
time  Robert  of  Duffield  was  extraordinarily  busy,  going  to 
the  West  of  England  and  then  to  the  Countess  of  Pembroke, 
and  then  to  Oxford  and  elsewhere,  as  it  is  noted  in  each  several 
case,  "  on  the  King's  affairs."  This  was  between  1324  and 
1326.2  Why  should  there  have  been  at  this  particular  period 
need  for  such  royal  activity  and  secret  intrigue?  Turn  to  the 
chronicles  of  the  time  and  the  whole  matter  becomes  clear. 
From  1322  to  1326  were  Edward's  only  years  of  real  inde- 
pendent power,  following  on  the  defeat  of  the  Earl  of  Lancaster 
at  Boroughbridge.  The  Earl  had  been  beheaded,  still  Edward 
was  by  no  means  safely  established.  His  Queen  had  gone 
with  her  son  and  Mortimer  to  France,  ostensibly  to  negotiate 
with  the  French  King,  really  to  betray  the  King  and  to 
obtain  forces  to  depose  him.  Besides  this  the  barons  were 
restive,  complaining  of  the  tyranny  of  the  royal  favourites,  the 
Despensers,  and  of  Edward's  misgovernment.  To  act  against 
all  this,  and  to  prepare  the  West  as  a  place  of  refuge  in  case 
of  an  uprising,  may  not  unreasonably  be  supposed  to  have 
been  his  object  in  thus  using  the  secret  services  of  his  Do- 
minican confessor.  Yet  surely  it  is  one  of  the  ironies  of 
history  that  it  should  have  been  at  Berkeley  Castle  that 
Duffield  had  his  expenses  paid  him  on  3  February  1324,3  for 
it  was  here  that  the  terrible  crime  was  committed  on  the  same 
hapless  Edward  II,  for  which  that  grim  fortress  is  famous  in 
all  history:  "No  marks  of  violence  were  seen;  but  though 
none  were  seen,  yet  some  were  heard;  for  when  the  fact  was 
in  doing  he  was  heard  to  roar  and  cry  all  the  castle  over  " 
(Baker's  Chro?ucle,  edition  of  1679,  p.  114). 

In  the  private  notebooks  of  the  various  kings,  as  we  have 
seen,  all  the  details  of  these  journeys  are  carefully  recorded. 
Some  are  rather  amusing,  as  they  give  scope  for  much  con- 
structive imagination.  Thus  one  confessor  lived  for  four  days 
in  London  on  6.?.  8d.,  while  another  for  twelve  days  at 
Harwich  along  with  a  fellow  Dominican,  chaplain  to  the 
Prince  of  Wales,  spent  275.  yd. — this  was  on  bread,  beer, 
fish,  and  eggs.    It  is  quite  noticeable  that  there  is  never  any 

1  P.R.O.  R.  C,  44  Hen.  Ill,  p.  2,  m.  2  dorso. 

2  Antiquary,  1890,  p.  160. 

3  P.R.O.  Lib.  de particulis  experts,  forensecar,  C.  G.,  17  Edw.  II. 


IRo^al  Confessors  115 

mention  of  wine  being  bought,  except  in  London.  This  is 
easy  to  understand,  for  it  came  from  beyond  the  seas,  and 
was  therefore  rather  expensive.  Consequently  in  London 
alone  was  there  any  possibility  of  its  being-  picked  up  easily. 
England,  as  a  whole,  was  not  a  wine-drinking  country.1 
Again,  in  the  metropolis,  Walter  de  Winterbourne,  in  1293, 
spent  72.?.  3jd.  in  bread,  wine,  beer,  and  fish.  Note,  that  if  in 
London  de  Winterbourne  ventures  to  buy  wine,  he  apparently 
does  not  venture  to  buy  eggs.  This  stands  in  no  need  of 
explanation.2 

Also  from  these  account  books  the  cheapness  of  mediaeval 
travelling  is  apparent,  as  when  John  of  Lenham  with  his 
companion,  John  of  Warfield,  and  a  boy  who  looked  after 
them,  for  a  journey  from  Warnehorne  to  London  and  for  a 
few  days'  stay  there  got  five  shillings.3  But  what  is  more 
marvellous,  especially  from  the  point  of  view  of  quick  travel- 
ling, is  a  voyage  undertaken  by  Nicholas  de  Herley  in  1339/ 
He  was  sent  to  Valenciennes,  apparently  from  London  or 
Westminster,  to  get  the  King's  jewels  and  his  book  of  the 
wardrobe,  which  had  been  left  behind  in  the  priory  of  the 
Dominicans  there.  These  things  had  probably  been  forgotten 
and  left  behind  earlier  in  the  same  year,  when  Edward  III 
made  his  useless  raid  into  Picardy,  in  which  province 
Valenciennes  is  situated.  Nicholas  started  on  28  October, 
and  got  back  on  3  November.  That  is  to  say,  he  took  only 
seven  days  to  go  down  to  the  sea,  cross  the  Channel,  traverse 
Picardy  almost  up  to  the  source  of  the  Scheldt,  and  then  re- 
turn to  London.  He  used  a  cart  and  four  horses  from 
Valenciennes  to  Calais  and  did  the  whole  trip  on  ^5  13s.  6d. 

In  1303,  when  King  Edward  I  was  in  Scotland,  Walter  de 
Winterbourne  seems  to  have  had  a  most  enjoyable  time.  He 
was  already  "  a  mighty  traveller  before  the  Eternal."  He  had 
passed  a  month  with  the  Countess  of  Gloucester  in  Wales  on 
the  King's  affairs,  and  had  then  been  up  to  Scotland  on  305. , 
following  the  present  route  of  the  Great  Northern  Railway 
by  York  and  Berwick,  to  where  the  King  lay.  Again  a 
second  time  he  had  to  proceed  up  the  Great  North  Road. 
First  of  all,  however,  he  had  to  spend  nine  weeks  in  London 
and  then  set  out.  From  the  beginning  to  the  end,  from 
27  January  to  19  April,  we  have  a  complete  record  of  all  his 
expenses.  Only  for  ten  days  are  there  no  accounts  given,  but 
this  short  interval  (April  3  to  14)  was  probably  spent  at  some 
hospitable  mansion  or  religious  house  on  the  route.5 

1  Compare  the  self-denying  ordinance  of  the  General  Chapter  of  Lon- 
don, 1250:  "  In  those  countries  in  which  wine  is  not  in  common  use,  let 
it  not  be  procured  or  bought  merely  for,  the  use  of  a  Provincial  or  General 

•■Chapter." — Reichart,  vol.  i,  p.  53. 

2  Antiquary,  1890,  p.  117.  3  Ibid.,  p.  119. 
*  Ibid.,  p.  160.  5  Ibid.,  p.  117. 


1 1 6  Zhc  Englisb  Dominicans 

Naturally  enough  for  a  Dominican  who  forswore  the  use  of 
flesh-meat  (and  in  all  these  accounts,  in  all  the  centuries,  I  do 
not  remember  to  have  found  one  single  entry  of  meat  having 
been  bought)  the  heaviest  item  on  the  bill  was  fish,  which 
cost  jQt>  lls-  6\d.  Bread  is  the  next  most  expensive  pro- 
vision. Also  we  note  that  after  leaving  London  he  does  not 
taste  wine  at  all.  It  is,  too,  in  London  alone  that  he  buys 
any  candles,  and  then  only  is.  $d.  worth.  At  Burton,  ap- 
propriately, he  puts  down  \\d.  for  beer.  This  wholesome 
beverage  was  the  third  most  expensive  item  on  his  hotel  bills, 
though  during  three  months  it  only  cost  him  6s.  &/.1 

In  Scotland  the  roads  seem  to  have  been  rather  rougher 
than  in  England,  for  we  find  him  forced  to  spend  35.  gd. 
on  ironwork  for  repairing  the  cart,  as  it  is  rather  invidiously 
called.  The  actual  pace,  judging  by  the  time  recorded  in 
passing  between  certain  towns,  averaged  about  twenty  miles 
a  day.2  This  is  really  fast  travelling,  if  one  stops  to  consider 
the  state  of  the  roads,  especially  at  that  time  of  the  year. 
This  much  may,  furthermore,  be  urged  in  favour  of  the 
Dominican's  horse  and  chariot,  that  they  had  a  good  deal  of 
luggage  to  carry.  Mention  is  made  of  transporting,  in  one 
place,  "chattels  and  provender,"3  in  another,  "the  father 
confessor's  bed,"4  in  a  third,  "two  stout  coffers  to  carry 
victuals."  ° 

Yet,  despite  the  horses,  there  is  an  enormous  bill  for  shoe- 
leather.  This,  indeed,  is  the  most  frequent  item  of  all.  In 
1289  Winterbourne  gets  a  pair  of  new  boots  when  sent  off  to 
visit  Alban,  the  King's  page,  who  was  lying  sick  at  Blakeney/ 
In  November  he  got  6d.  to  buy  himself  winter  shoes.  That 
was  not  much.  But  in  131 1,  on  28  December,  the  confessor 
was  given  another  5s.7  The  year  13 12  seems  to  have  been 
particularly  bad,  thus  4  March,  35.  6d.,  26  May,  3s.  Then  the 
bill  seems  to  have  been  allowed  to  run  on  for  some  time,  for 
in  the  next  year  the  account  book  shows  24s.  spent  all  at 
once.  Altogether  things  were  getting  too  expensive;  so 
Edward  II  tried  a  new  experiment  with  Robert  of  Duffield.8 
Henceforward  the  royal  confessor  was  to  receive  40s.  a  year, 
with  which  he  had  to  find  his  own  boots  and  saddles.  Besides 
this,  he  was  to  have  new  habits,  new  bed-clothes,  and  new 
coverlets  every  year  at  Pentecost  and  All  Saints.  Not,  how- 
ever, that  this  new  regime  was  always  adhered  to.  For  in- 
stance, in  1377,  at  the  end  of  March  (and  Pentecost  can  never 
fall  earlier  than  10  May),  William  Seward  receives  cloth  for 
winter  and  summer  habits,  bedding,  table  linen,  etc.  Still  the 
regulation  made  for  Duffield  is  continued  for  his  successors 
up  to  the  death  of  Richard  II. 

1  Antiquary,  1890,  p.  117.  2  Ibid.  3  Ibid. 

*  Ibid.,  p.  159.  5  Ibid.,  p.  120.  6  Ibid.,  p.  116. 

7  Ibid,,  p.  120.  8  Ibid.,  p.  159. 


IRopal  Contessovs  "7 

This  yearly  gift  of  winter  and  summer  habits  is  carefully  and 
accurately  measured.  In  the  winter,  eleven  ells  of  white  cloth 
were  given  for  the  actual  habit,  and  eleven  ells  of  black  cloth 
for  the  cloak,  or  cappa,  worn  over  the  white,  from  which,  indeed, 
the  Dominicans  were  known  in  England  as  the  Black  Friars. 
In  the  summer  the  white  cloth  was  to  be  twelve  ells  in  length 
and  the  black  twelve  ells  and  a  half.  However,  besides  this 
there  were  twelve  more  ells  for  riding  cappas  "  clothed  with- 
in," and  a  great  deal  more  of  white  for  mysterious  garments 
grouped  under  the  heading  of  breeches  and  langellae.1  Of 
course  there  were  odd  items  for  cutting  out  the  clothes  (they 
cost  us.  to  make  up),  for  mending,  even  for  washing  them, 
and  an  occasional  entry  for  towels  and  socks.2  Lastly,  there 
is  a  quaint  detail  which  adds  a  finish  to  the  picture  of 
mediaeval  Dominican  dress.  When  Winterbourne  journeyed 
to  Scotland  he  found  that  the  way  was  long  and,  more 
especially  on  account  of  his  shaven  crown,  that  the  wind  was 
cold,  so  he  spent  is.  6d.  on  the  purchase  of  a  cap.3  This  was 
evidently  in  the  shop  of  a  canny  Scot,  for  in  1306  Luke  de 
Woodford  bought  two  caps  in  England  for  2s.  2d.  the  lot.1 

So  far  as  lodging  was  concerned,  the  King's  confessor 
ordinarily  lodged  in  the  royal  palace.  But  occasionally  it  was 
not  so.  When  His  Majesty  was  away  from  home,  whether  on 
affairs  of  war  or  peace,  his  chaplain  went  with  him,  but  could 
not  always  find  room  for  himself  in  the  same  abode.  However, 
there  are  sufficient  accounts  left  to  enable  us  to  reconstruct 
in  imagination  what  their  house  would,  in  these  circumstances, 
be  like.  Take,  for  example,  a  bill  in  the  name  of  Luke  de 
Woodford,  at  the  end  of  November  1306.6  Three  years 
previously  Walter  de  Winterbourne  had  paid  lod.  for  getting 
a  house  ready,  but  De  Woodford's  establishment  was  much 
more  elaborate.  It  was  built  of  timber;  and  for  this,  as 
being  probably  from  the  King's  forests,  he  has  nothing  to 
pay,  except  the  carriage.  This  came  to  yd.  Then  the 
chamber  and  a  yard  outside  it  were  built  up,  wattled  all  round 
for  lod.  The  size  of  the  place  must  have  been  really  quite 
large,  for  the  roofing  of  it,  though  only  costing  8d. ,  took 
three  assistants,  together  with  the  master-roofer,  four  days 
of  hard  work.G  Then  "  daubers"  appear  on  the  scene,  who 
work  for  four  days,  then  six  journeymen  putting  in  two  days 
more.  The  payment  for  all  this  daubing  came  rather  ex- 
pensively to  4-y.  After  that  men  were  called  in  to  make 
windows  and  doors,  adding  a  further  sum  of  gs.  Boarding 
and  nails  at  the  end  of  the  bill  bring  up  the  amount  to  gs.  yd., 

1  Antiquary,  1890,  p.  119.  2  Ibid.,  p.  117.  s  Ibid. 

4  Ibid.,  p.  119.  5  Ibid. 

6  The  King  ordered  the  Sheriff  of  Wiltshire  in  1270  to  build  a  house  of 
24  ft.  long-  and  12  tt.  wide  for  the  Dominicans  who  were  to  stay  near  him 
at  Clarendon.    His  own  hunting  box  there  was  only  30  ft.  by  12  ft. 


1 18  Ube  lEiujlisb  Dominicans 

which  is  pretty  cheap  considering  that  the  house  had  to  ac- 
commodate the  confessor,  his  companion,  and  their  boy. 

Inside,  the  walls  were  lined  with  tapestries,  as  we  learn 
from  other  bills  scattered  up  and  down  the  centuries.1  In  the 
corner  was  the  confessor's  bed  (his  companion's  bed  is  never 
mentioned)  on  which  were  mattresses,  blankets,  and  counter- 
panes, and  it  was  screened  off  by  curtains,  14s.  having  been 
paid  for  two  red  serges  for  that  purpose.2  If  the  father  con- 
fessor was  anything  like  the  gentry  of  his  own  time,  his  bed 
would  have  been  as  important  by  day  as  it  was  by  night. 
Witness  one  of  the  Paston  letters  (No.  283),  "written  in  my 
sleeping  time  at  afternoon  at  Whitsuntide." 

Besides  this,  there  was  a  chapel  close  at  hand.  Richard  II 
used  to  say  the  Divine  Office  according  to  the  Dominican 
rite;  and  in  1395  Boniface  IX  granted  leave  to  all  clerics 
saying  it  with  him  to  continue  it  for  two  months,  if  tempor- 
arily absent.  There  are  scattered  items  of  altar  coverings 
"above  and  below,"  candles,  casks  and  pipes  of  wine,  a 
missal,  and  other  appurtenances  for  saying  Mass.3 

The  royal  gift  of  the  missal  is  rather  interesting,  as  it 
shows  us  the  hand  to  mouth  existence  of  the  King's  house- 
hold. It  was  presented  on  29  October  1289  to  Walter  de 
Winterbourne,  but  the  Clerk  of  the  Wardrobe  notes  that  it 
had  been  promised  at  Beleyard  quite  a  year  before.  The 
reason  for  this  delay  is  that  Edward  I  is  only  just  now  able 
to  pay  for  it,  as  at  last  he  has  got  60s.  in  his  exchequer.4 

In  contrast  to  the  poverty  of  his  royal  penitent,  we  find 
one  confessor  actually  lending  money  to  a  Scottish  Queen,' 
who,  however,  did  not  see  fit  to  repay  him  ;  another  to  the 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury/  while  a  third  is  plundered  by  free- 
booters7 at  Portsmouth,  two  royal  officers  being  sent  after 
the  robbers,  who,  no  doubt,  thought  they  were  acting  in  the 
highest  interests  of  religious  observance.  But  this  is  a 
digression. 

After  the  house  and  chapel  of  the  royal  confessor  comes 
the  kitchen,  "church  and  kitchen,  bell-house  and  burgh- 
gate."  The  evidence  of  the  existence  of  this  is,  first  of  all, 
the  names  mentioned  of  several  of  the  cooks.  One,  Thomas, 
seems  to  have  been  quite  important.  Through  him  the  royal 
pension  was  occasionally  sent  to  the  confessor.8  Another, 
William  de  Standoneor  de  North,  must  have  been  an  extrava- 
gant gallant,  for  he  has  left  behind  very  many  bills  for  new 
clothes.9 

We  have  no  record  of  the  menu  nor  of  the  success  of  the 
cooking,  beyond,  in  1239,  "three  courses  of  dishes  and  good 

1  Antiquary,  1890,  p.  118.  *  Ibid.,  p.  159.  3  Ibid.,  p.  264. 

4  P.R.O.  R.  Elemos.  R.,  17-18  Edw.  I. 

0  Antiquary,  1890,  p.  264.  B  Ibid.,  p.  116.  7  Ibid.,  p.  263. 

8  Ibid.,  p.  117.  9  Ibid.,  p.  119. 


IRosal  Confessors  "9 

wine."1  The  only  other  items  which  seem  to  be  connected 
with  the  cuisine  refer  to  the  purchase  of  a  brass  pot  and  six 
silver  spoons.2  This  seems  to  be  rather  a  limited  stock  of 
utensils,  but  agrees  with  the  well-known  monastic  taste  for 
simple  diet. 

Even  after  they  have  retired  from  the  arduous  work  of 
directing-  the  royal  conscience,  these  Dominicans  were  not 
forgotten  by  their  penitents.  Luke  de  Woodford,  first  in  the 
priory  at  London,  later  in  the  priory  at  King's  Langley,  got  a 
retiring  pension  of^io  a  year.3  John  Burghill,  who  had  been 
promoted  to  the  Bishopric  of  Coventry  and  Lichfield,  was  pre- 
sented with  two  pipes  of  wine  a  year,  only  discontinued  after 
the  deposition  and  death  of  his  sovereign,  Richard  II.4  Even 
Bishop  Rushook,  banished  to  Cork  for  his  defence  of  the  same 
unhappy  monarch,  was  allowed  by  Henry  IV  the  sum  of  £40 
a  year.  He  had  been  permitted  to  take  with  him  to  Ireland 
"  one  bed,  clothing,  a  book  for  saying  his  Hours,  and  two 
English  servants."3 

Even  when  the  royal  confessors  have  been  stricken  by 
Great  Death  they  are  still  remembered  by  these  Plantagenets. 
For  instance,  Edward  II,  the  most  affectionate  of  kings, 
grateful  himself  to  others,  though  few  were  found  in  his  day 
of  trial  grateful  to  him,  remembers,  even  in  death,  John  of 
Warfield,  the  first  prior  of  his  generous  foundation  at  King's 
Langley.  It  was  here  that  Edward  had  raised  the  most 
glorious  friary  in  all  England  to  the  memory  of  his  murdered 
friend,  Piers  Gaveston.  To-day  there  remains  of  it  hardly  one 
stone  upon  a  stone.  But  of  old  it  was  one  of  the  most  mag- 
nificent religious  houses  within  our  four  seas.  Of  this  John 
of  Warfield  had  been  nominated  first  prior.  Subsequently  he 
became  the  King's  confessor,  though  he  did  not  live  to  hold 
that  office  for  more  than  a  year.  Edward,  however,  on 
25  June  1316,  provided  "against  his  funeral  at  King's 
Langley,  £6  os.  i8d."  for  wax  and  other  like  expenses.6 

Finally,  we  can  pass  from  life  and  death  and  burial  of  the 
royal  confessor  to  his  last  will  and  testament.  Perhaps  it 
appears  strange  to  find  a  poor  friar  able  to  bequeath  his  effects. 
But,  of  course,  this  could  only  occur  by  permission  of  the  Holy 
See,  and  then  usually  in  the  case  of  prelates  alone.  At  any 
rate,  the  few  wills  that  remain  are  precisely  those  of  the 
Dominican  royal  chaplains  who  became  bishops.  Of  these 
the  most  interesting,  certainly  the  most  amusing,  is  that  of 
Alexander  Bache,  consecrated  in  1390  Lord  Bishop  of  S. 
Asaph.  Here  the  horse  plays  the  same  important  role  it  has 
always  played  in  the  annals  of  these  friar  preachers.  The 
will  runs  as  follows : 

1  P.R.O.  R.  de  L.,  23  Hen.  Ill,  m.  3. 

-  Antiquary,  1890,  pp.  120  and  264.  3  Ibid.,  p.  119. 

4  Ibid.,  1 89 1,  p.  25.  5  Ibid.,  1890,  p.  265.  G  Ibid.,  p.  159. 


120  ube  BttQlisb  Dominicans 

"  In  the  name  of  the  High  and  Undivided  Trinity.  Amen. 
The  death-bringing  fall  of  our  first  father,  Adam,  who  ex- 
changed his  state  of  innocency  and  immortality  for  a  hapless 
mortality,  has  passed  on  his  sad  fate  to  his  children,  who 
must  one  and  all  be  infected  with  the  taint  of  original  sin, 
which  is  death'.  This  revolving  in  my  mind,  I,  Alexander, 
Bishop  of  St.  Asaph's  and  confessor  of  my  lord  the  King,  in 
the  enjoyment  of  full  memory,  proceed  to  make  my  testament 
in  this  wise : 

"  First  I  bequeath  my  soul  to  God,  and  to  St.  Asaph,  His 
ever  glorious  confessor,  and  to  all  the  saints,  and  my  body  to 
be  buried  in  the  Church  of  the  Friars  Preachers  of  Hereford 
in  whatsoever  place  it  seemeth  good  to  them.  Also  to  Sir 
John  Graunger,  twenty  marks  sterling  and  the  black  horse  on 
which  I  am  most  wont  to  ride.  Also  to  Griffin  Percyvale,  my 
groom  of  the  chamber,  ten  marks  sterling  and  the  best  that 
he  chooses  among  all  my  carriage  horses.  To  John  Crawley, 
my  barber,  five  marks  and  whatsoever  horse  my  executors 
think  fit.  To  William  Ravening  forty  pounds  sterling  and  the 
horse  which  he  is  wont  to  ride.  To  the  three  several  boys  of 
my  stable,  each  135'.  4^.  To  Jim,  my  messenger  boy,  forty 
pounds  sterling  and  the  horse  he  generally  uses. 

"  Also  I  leave  a  garment,  parti-coloured  blue  and  red, 
woven  of  cloth-of-gold,  that  lies  in  my  chamber  in  London,  to 
the  Convent  of  Friars  Preachers  at  Hereford.1  Also  to  the 
Convent  of  Friars  Preachers  in  London  20.?.  Also  to  the 
Convent  of  Preachers  at  Hereford  40?.  Also  I  will  that  my 
hostel  at  Lynehost,  near  London,  in  Farbor  Lane,  be  sold,  and 
the  money  distributed  for  my  soul's  benefit  according  to  the 
discretion  of  my  executors.  Also  to  Friar  Thomas  Castle  ten 
marks.  In  order  that  they  may  faithfully  execute  my  will,  I 
name  as  executors,  John  Prophet,  my  kinsman,  Friar  William 
Seward,  John  Graunger,  my  chaplain  aforesaid.  By  whose 
witness  I  append  my  seal  at  Clatford,  the  thirteenth  day  ot 
the  month  of  August,  one  thousand  three  hundred  and  ninety- 
four,  the  fifth  year  of  our  episcopal  consecration."  ' 

The  Notary  of  Probate  at  Canterbury  adds  that  :  "  In  the 
memory  of  man  the  custom  is  peaceably  and  continually 
observed,  rightly  and  lawfully  prescribed,  whereby  the  Arch- 
bishop of  Canterbury  for  the  time  being  receiveth  from  the 
effects  of  each  Bishop  of  St.  Asaph,  who  sleepeth  in  the  Lord, 
his  pontifical  ring,  his  best  oblong  seal,  his  best  palfrey, 
riding-cloak,  saddle,  bridle,  and  buskins  which  the  aforesaid 
Bishop  hath  himself  used — wherefore  these,  all  and  every, 
belonging  to  the  above-mentioned  Lord  Alexander,  Bishop  of 

1  In  1399  Thomas  Arundel,  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  commanded  the 
bishops  of  regular  clergy  to  appear  in  Parliament  dressed  in  their  reli- 
gious habits  and  not  in  costume  of  secular  bishops. 

-  Willis,  Survey  of  S.  Asaph's,  p.  211,  and  Wills,  P.C.C.,  33  Rous. 


i  t.\ 


- 


[To  face  p.  120 


IRopal  Confessors  121 

St.  Asaph,  lately  deceased,  were  received  by  the  most  reverend 
father  in  Christ,  my  Lord  Archbishop  that  now  is." 

But  it  cannot  be  said  that  all  these  royal  confessors  and 
ambassadors  behaved  quite  as  properly  as  they  should  have 
done.  Nicholas  of  Wisbeach  was  at  one  time  a  person  of 
some  standing-,  a  Dominican  friar  in  whom  Edward  II  put 
very  great  trust.  As  late  as  1 3 1 8  he  was  considered  fit  enough 
to  be  sent  by  the  King  to  the  Duke  of  Brabant  to  bring  back  a 
gold  cross  and  some  jewels  which  Edward,  his  father,  had  lent 
(pawned?)  to  John,  late  Duke  of  Brabant,  and  which  were 
required  for  the  coronation.  The  letters  of  recommendation  to 
the  Provincial  of  France  or  to  Bernard  Guidonis  speak  highly 
of  Wisbeach's  character.1  In  February  13 19  he  returned  from 
the  Pope  and  was  then  spoken  of  as  "  a  religious  man  and  our 
beloved  in  Christ,"  for  whom  the  King  petitioned  the  office 
of  Penitentiary."  By  8  June  there  was  evidently  some  sus- 
picion in  the  royal  mind,  since  in  place  of  Nicholas,  "now 
no  longer  worthy,"  the  name  of  John  of  Wrotham  is  asked  for 
as  Papal  Penitentiary.3  On  28  April  1320  reports  began  to 
arrive  which  Edward  could  not  discredit,  though  he  does  not 
directly  affirm  their  truth.4  "It  is  said  "  is  the  farthest  that 
the  kindly  King  will  go.  Alas !  for  human  curiosity,  we  have 
no  knowledge  of  what  "  they  said." 

Another  friar  whose  name  figures  in  writs  and  royal  letters 
to  sheriffs  is  Thomas  Dunheved  of  the  Blackfriars,  London. 
His  story  as  far  as  can  be  ascertained  is  somehow  connected 
with  contemporary  politics,  though  the  tangle  of  parts  is 
disconcerting.  In  1323  he  went  over  sea  on  the  king's  affairs.5 
As  early  as  1325  he  was  spoken  of  by  the  younger  Despenser 
as  being  at  the  Roman  Court  in  order  to  procure  a  divorce 
for  Edward  II  from  his  Queen.6  Here  he  was  clearly  on  the 
royal  side  just  at  the  beginning  of  the  final  rebellion  in  which 
the  luckless  young  king  went  down.  The  Lanercost  Chronicle 
speaks  of  the  friar  as  a  "  religious  acting  irreligiously,"  and 
couples  with  him  on  this  errand  Robert  Baldock  who  certainly 
belonged  to  the  royal  party.  But  in  1326  the  King  wrote  a 
long  letter  to  the  Pope,  begging  him  not  to  receive  Thomas 
Dunheved  as  his  messenger.7  Friar  Thomas  had  gone  about 
declaring  himself  to  be  the  Pope's  chaplain,  had  withdrawn 
from  the  discipline  of  the  Order,  and  had  left  the  kingdom 
without  leave ;  hence  the  Master-General  was  asked  to  chastise 
him  in  Rome.  Moreover,  it  is  declared  that,  no  doubt  as  ap- 
pertaining to  his  supposed  Papal  office,  Thomas  habitually 

1  P.R.O.  R.  R.  etF.,  n-14  Edw.  II,  m.  13  dorso. 

2  Ibid.,  m.  9  dorso.  3  Ibid.,  m.  8  dorso. 

4  Ibid.,  m.  4. 

5  P.R.O.  Lib.  de part,  experts,  foren.  C.  G.  R.,  17  Edw.  II. 
c  Chronicon  de  Lanercost  (Maitland  Club,  1839),  p.  254. 

7  P.R.O.  R.  R.  etF.,  19-20  Edw.  II,  m.  3. 


i22  ube  Bngltsfo  Dominicans 

wore  a  bishop's  rochet,  rode  a  horse,  frequented  the  company 
of  seculars,  and  ate  meat  and  committed  several  other  matters 
of  naughtiness.  Horrified  at  this  outrageous  conduct  the 
King  bade  him  go  to  the  noviciate  house  of  King's  Langley, 
where  he  was  to  submit  himself  to  the  strict  regular  observ- 
ance there  in  force ;  instead  of  which,  however,  he  fled  over 
sea  without  leave,  pretending  to  be  a  royal  ambassador,  a 
ruse  all  the  easier  of  success  since  he  had  really  been  so  once. 
Now  this  letter  it  is  certain  was  none  of  the  King's  devising, 
but  was  clearly  an  attempt  on  the  part  of  Mortimer  and 
Queen  Isabella  to  prevent  Edward's  hastily  despatched  mes- 
senger having  any  influence  in  Rome.  Somehow  by  June 
1327  he  has  got  back,  and  together  with  Stephen  Dunheved, 
John  Sabant,  and  others,  was  busy  making  the  neighbourhood 
of  Chester  the  centre  of  political  agitation  and  organization 
for  the  return  of  Edward  II  to  power.  To  Mortimer  and  the 
Queen  this  loyal  behaviour  is  described  as  "homicide,  arson, 
and  illegal  meetings."  1  Two  months  later  all  the  sheriff's  had 
a  black  list  sent  to  them  containing  the  names  of  some  friars 
(among  whom  figures  Thomas  Dunheved),  a  monk  of  Hailes, 
and  several  others  who  have  attacked  Berkeley  Castle  to- 
gether with  a  band  of  foot  and  horse  that  had  refused  to 
march  against  the  Scots.  This  seems  certain  evidence  that 
Friar  Thomas  was  clearly  a  warm  partisan  of  Edward  II,  that 
princely  friend  of  all  Dominicans,  and  that  the  supposed  royal 
letter  of  1326  was  the  concoction  of  Mortimer  and  the  Queen, 
who  in  the  name  of  the  boy  Edward  III  seized  in  that  year  the 
reins  of  government.2  In  1330  on  16  March, Thomas  tried  to  stir 
up  the  people  to  restore  Edward  II,  whom  by  magic  he  proved 
to  many  people  to  be  still  alive.  With  him  were  three  other 
Dominicans,  John,  Edmund,  and  Richard ;  the  Earl  of  Kent 
entirely  believed  in  them,  revolted,  was  caught  and  beheaded. 
The  friars  themselves  were  captured  also  and  died  in  prison 
at  Pontefract,  Thomas  Dunheved  being  killed  in  the  act  of 
escaping.3  Up  till  1355  there  are  records  of  preaching  friars 
still  stirring  up  opposition  to  Edward  III  on  the  plea  that 
Edward  II  was  still  alive.4  After  that  date  there  seems  to 
have  been  no  further  trouble. 

But  more  important  people  than  poor  Thomas  Dunheved 
came  to  grief.  Thomas  de  Lisle,5  whose  seal  attached  to  a 
deed  executed  by  him  at  Downham  on  3  February  1352 
shows  him  to  have  belonged  to  the  great  Lisle  family,  became 
a  Dominican  at  Cambridge  when  hardly  more  than  a  boy. 

1  P.R.O.,  R.  P.,  1  Edw.  Ill,  p.  2,  m.  14  dorso. 

2  P.R.O.  R.  R.,  1  Edw.  Ill,  p.  2,  m.  3  dorso.  Cf.  E.  H.  R.,  Jan.  1916, 
pp.  121  et  seq. 

3  Chronicon  de  Lanercost,  pp.  260,  265. 

1  P.R.O.  R.  P.,  29  Edw.  Ill,  m.  6  dorso. 

5  Dictionary  of  National  Biography,  vol.  xi,  pp.  1 222-1 224. 


1Ro$al  Confessors  123 

After  a  career  of  not  exceptional  brilliance,  his  aristocratic 
connections  secured  for  him  the  diocese  of  Ely  to  which  he 
was  provided  in  July  1344.  At  first  his  court  and  whole 
manner  of  life  was  conducted  very  magnificently,  but  as  he 
grew  accustomed  to  his  position  he  gradually  gave  up  much 
of  that  earlier  pomp  and  circumstance.  But  he  seems  to  have 
held  very  tenaciously  by  the  principles  of  his  Order,  and  in 
consequence  his  episcopal  life  was  embittered  by  continual 
struggles.  His  first  public  quarrel  was  with  Edward  III, 
who  had  asked  him  to  consecrate  Robert  Stretton,  who  was 
Bishop  Elect  of  Coventry  and  Lichfield.  The  Archbishop  of 
Canterbury  was  doubtful  over  the  matter,  but  Bishop  de  Lisle 
stoutly  refused  on  the  convincing  reason  that  Robert  could 
neither  read  nor  write.  The  King,  whose  personal  choice 
Robert  Stretton  had  been,  was  furious.  To  his  opposition 
and  incitement,  the  Bishop  traced  his  next  trouble  which  was 
with  Lady  Blanche  Wake,  the  granddaughter  of  Henry  III. 
Her  farm  at  Coin  had  been  burnt  down,  and  the  Bishop  was 
accused  of  having  indulged  in  this  petty  spite.  Indeed,  he 
was  convicted  in  the  courts,  and  though  he  applied  for  a 
writ  of  attaint,  could  get  no  redress.  In  his  own  impetuous 
fashion  he  boldly  interrupted  the  King  in  the  middle  of  his 
hawking,  and  accused  him  of  having  set  going  the  whole 
affair.  Both  were  very  hot,  and  after  much  angry  talk  separ- 
ated without  any  benefit  to  the  Bishop.  When  next  Parlia- 
ment met,  and  King  and  Bishop  had  to  see  each  other, 
Edward  refused  to  have  speech  with  de  Lisle,  asserting  to 
his  friends  that  he  would  have  no  dealings  at  all  with  his 
opponent  till  the  taunt  of  royal  interference  in  the  Courts  had 
been  withdrawn.  To  the  same  audience  the  Bishop  declared 
that  he  had  not  meant  to  imply  (though  this  does  seem  rather 
an  afterthought)  any  personal  action  on  the  part  of  the  King, 
but  of  the  King's  ministers.  Even  so  Edward  was  obdurate. 
Then  to  make  matters  worse,  one  of  the  Bishop's  servants, 
a  Roman,  murdered  a  servant  of  Lady  Wake,  and  fled  to 
Normandy  out  of  the  way  of  the  law.  After  all  that  had 
gone  before,  suspicion  at  once  pointed  to  the  Bishop  for 
harbouring  the  criminal  and  securing  his  escape,  and  the 
mob,  furious  at  the  murder  of  an  Englishman  by  a  foreigner, 
insulted  him.  By  what  he  held  to  be  a  breach  of  Magna 
Charta,  Bishop  de  Lisle  was  summoned  to  the  King's  Bench, 
denied  the  judgement  of  his  peers,  tried  by  a  jury  of  com- 
moners, declared  guilty  of  aiding  and  abetting  and  conceal- 
ing a  murderer,  and  his  temporalities  seized.  Protesting 
furiously  against  this  overbearing  of  canon  and  common 
law,  Bishop  de  Lisle  appealed  to  the  Archbishop  of  Canter- 
bury, who  was  thoroughly  frightened  by  the  irreconcilable 
attitude  of  both  parties  and  thought  it  safer  and  more 
prudent  for  himself  to  say  nothing.     On  19  November  1356 


124  XTbe  JSngltsb  Dominicans 

the  Bishop,  in  fear  of  his  own  life  and  evidently  not  wishing 
to  add  another  Thomas  to  the  list  of  martyrs,  fled  over  sea  to 
Bruges  and  thence  to  Avignon.  After  many  excommunica- 
tions had  been  launched  against  him,  the  King  at  last  sub- 
mitted, but  meanwhile  the  Bishop  had  died  at  the  Dominican 
Nunnery  of  S.  Praxedes  near  Avignon,  where  he  was  buried 
on  23  June  1361. 

Bishop  John  Gilbert,  O.P. ,  of  Hereford  had  an  even  nearer 
approach  to  summary  execution,  for  he  was  one  of  the  thirteen 
Lords  of  Parliament  appointed  to  govern  the  kingdom  for  the 
boy  king,  Richard  II.  In  1386  he  was  Lord  High  Treasurer.1 
On  3  May  1389  Richard  ousted  this  overboard  of  councillors 
and  took  command  of  government.  Bishop  John  resigned  his 
office  and  was  translated  on  5  May  to  the  see  of  S.  David's, 
but  on  20  August  was  once  more  back  at  the  Treasury.  Many 
accusations  were  made  against  him  and  Bishop  Wykeham  the 
Chancellor,  who  both  again  resigned  and  challenged  Parlia- 
ment to  inspect  their  official  work.  The  Commons  asked  for 
a  day  to  discuss  the  crisis,  went  through  the  records  of 
Treasury  and  Chancellory,  and  declared  the  conduct  of  both 
irreproachable.  Together  they  re-entered  office  and  suffered 
no  further  molestation. 

Sometimes  the  friars  acted  as  chaplains  to  the  nobility.  On 
28  November  1322  F.  Adam  Stokes  has  licence  from  the 
Bishop  of  Winchester  to  confess  the  Lisle  family.'*  In  Le- 
land's  Collectanea,  under  22  March  of  the  same  year,  occurs 
the  following  incident,  though  the  name  of  the  Dominican 
concerned  is  not  known.3  It  occurred  when  Thomas,  Earl  of 
Lancaster,  who  had  led  the  narrow-minded  party  of  barons 
in  revolt  against  Edward  II,  and  after  some  success  was 
finally  defeated  at  Boroughbridge,  was  captured  and  con- 
demned to  death:  "He  was  caryed,  sum  throwing  Pelottes 
of  Dyrt  at  hym,  and  having  a  Frerer  Precher  for  his  Con- 
fessor with  hym,  on  to  a  Hylle  with  owte  the  Toune,  where 
he  knelid  downe  toward  the  Este,  on  tylle  one  Hughin  de 
Muston  caussid  hym  to  turne  his  Face  towarde  Scotlande : 
wher  kneling  a  Villayne  of  London  cut  off  his  Hedde." 
Despite  his  selfish  policy  and  oligarchic,  even  tyrannic, 
methods  of  agitation,  Thomas  of  Lancaster  achieved  a  cer- 
tain popularity  with  north  country  folk,  sufficient  at  least  to 
have  gained  for  him  canonization  among  the  people.  An 
office  was  actually  composed  in  his  honour,  and  the  day  of 
his  death  kept  as  the  feast  of  a  martyr. 

Another  conspirator,  Aumale  (whose  double  dealing  and 
sudden    repentance    are    described    by    Shakespeare    in    the 

1   Godwin,  De praesulibus  Angliae,  pp.  484,  582,  622. 
a  Baigent,  Register  of  Rigmid  de  Asserio  (Hampshire  Rec.  Soc),  An. 
1322. 
3  Leland,  Collectanea,  vol.  ii,  p.  465. 


racial  ConTessovs  125 

famous  scene  where  York's  Duke  and  Duchess  plead  against 
each  other  to  Henry  IV),  was  empowered  by  the  Master- 
General  to  take  Galfrid  Laund  as  his  confessor.  The  said 
Friar  Galfrid  had  special  permission  from  Rome,  dated 
18  October  1398/  to  act  as  physician  to  Aumale  and  his 
friends,  and  to  choose  his  own  priory,  no  doubt  so  as  to  be 
able  to  follow  his  patron  over  the  kingdom.  In  1346  Friar 
John  of  Lincoln,  described  as  being  of  the  household  of  John 
de  Warren,  Earl  of  Surrey,  was  evidently  chaplain  to  the 
Earl.2  For  him  such  an  office  meant  plenty  of  excitement, 
since  that  year  he  took  out  royal  letters  of  protection,  as  he 
declared  that  he  stood  in  bodily  peril  of  "  rivals,"  keen  com- 
petitors for  keeping  the  Earl's  conscience.  Alexander  Bache, 
whom  we  have  already  cited  as  having  been  a  royal  confessor 
and  Bishop  of  S.  Asaph's,  had  previously  been  trained  for 
his  work  by  acting  as  chaplain  to  John  Hastings,  Earl  of 
Pembroke.3  As  the  said  John  was  one  of  the  greatest  black- 
guards of  his  time,  Friar  Bache  must  have  been  kept  busy. 
He  was  with  the  Earl  in  Spain  when  the  attempt  was  made 
by  the  English  to  relieve  La  Rochelle,  and  fell  a  prisoner  with 
him  when  that  relief  force  was  defeated  and  captured  by  the 
French.  After  a  wait  of  some  months,  during  which  time  no 
news  reached  him,  the  Earl  of  Pembroke  wrote  to  Bertrand 
Duguesclin,  who  so  brilliantly  led  the  French  armies,  and 
whose  chivalry  was  as  famous  as  his  skill  in  war,  asking  to 
be  set  free.  The  Breton  leader  acted  in  accordance  with  his 
wonted  generosity  and  knightliness  by  actually  himself  paying 
the  Earl's  ransom  and  thus  freeing  his  opposing  general. 
Hastings  had  sufficient  appreciation  of  what  had  been  done 
to  set  off  for  Paris  in  order  to  thank  Duguesclin  in  person, 
but  died  at  Calais  in  1376.  Hastings  had  previously  made  a 
will  on  Palm  Sunday,  1374,  leaving  his  body  to  be  buried 
under  the  high  altar  of  the  Dominican  priory  church  at 
Hereford,  to  which  community  Alexander  then  belonged.  The 
will  is  witnessed  to,  among  others,  by  "  Friar  Alexander 
Bache,  my  confessor."  Perhaps  it  will  be  remembered  from 
an  earlier  chapter  that  though  John  Hastings'  body  was 
brought  over  and  buried  at  Hereford  as  he  had  desired,  it 
was  eventually  disinterred  and  taken  to  the  Grey  Friars  in 
London  "  to  avoid  disputes." 

Among  the  private  letters  of  John  Prophet,  Dean  of 
Hereford,  there  is  one  in  1407  written  to  some  unknown 
"dearest  colleague  and  friend,"  in  which  he  makes  mention 
of  a  gift  of  timber  granted  at  the  instance  "  of  our  venerable 
Friar  John  Montagu,  our  most  beloved  of  friends."4  Though 

1  Regestum  B.  Raymundi,  Add.  MSS. ,  6716. 

2  P.R.O.  R.  P.,  20  Edw.  Ill,  p.  2,  m.  28. 

3  Antiquary,  1891,  p.  24. 

4  Brit.  Mus.,  Harl.  MSS.,  431,  fol.  1,  io8b. 


126  xrbe  Bnglisb  Dominicans 

not  a  chaplain  or  confessor,  John  Montagu  was  evidently  a 
charming  personality,  quite  a  well  known  Dominican  of  his 
day,  and  just  such  a  character  as  had  friends  everywhere.  It 
was  he  whom  the  Provincial  Chapter  sent  to  Hereford  as 
regent  in  1400,  when  the  Dean  petitioned  them  for  a  pro- 
fessor since  the  Dominican  studies  there  had  wholly  col- 
lapsed. The  fact  that  it  is  the  Dean  who  complains  makes 
it  clear  that  here,  as  elsewhere,  the  cathedral  theological 
school,  made  obligatory  in  each  diocese  by  General  Councils, 
existed  solely  within  the  Dominican  priory  and  was  identical 
with  the  local  Dominican  school.  But  John  Montagu,  "  most 
beloved  of  friends,"  found  himself  in  1407  prior  as  well  as 
regent,  and  wrote  a  garrulous  letter  to  Bishop  Clifford  of 
London  to  tell  him  the  sad  news,  lamenting  how  difficult  it  was 
for  him  to  bear  all  these  burdens,  so  old  was  he  and  worn  out. 
Truth  to  tell,  Friar  John  was  really  just  out  to  get  compli- 
ments and  got  them,  for  the  Bishop  wrote  back  chafnngly  to 
say  what  he  was  evidently  meant  to  say,  that  of  course  Friar 
John  was  not  old  at  all,  that  the  popularity  of  his  lectures  at 
Hereford  was  part  of  the  London  gossip,  and  that  his 
unanimous  election  as  prior  showed  at  any  rate  how  his 
brethren  loved  him.  Then  after  pointing  out  how  the  good 
of  the  Order  was  to  be  preferred  to  his  own  natural  shrink- 
ing from  responsibility,  Bishop  Clifford  finished  off  this  com- 
pliment by  jokingly  accusing  the  good  friar  of  untruthfulness 
in  over-stating  his  age,  and  of  laziness  in  trying  to  get  out  of 
the  priorship.  This  genial  ecclesiastical  banter  shows  the 
personal  character  of  the  friar  and  the  friendly  feeling  be- 
tween him  and  these  Church  dignitaries.  A  second  letter 
from  the  Bishop  of  London  laments  their  delay  in  meeting, 
and  expresses  his  longing  to  see  again  this  "  most  beloved  of 
friars." 

As  confessors  of  kings  and  in  one  public  capacity  or 
another  the  English  Dominicans  retained  some  small  direct 
influence  over  national  affairs;  but  it  is  to  their  indirect  in- 
fluence that  their  chiefest  work  was  due,  for  it  is  at  least 
arguable  that  the  English  Parliament  in  its  form  and  consti- 
tution is  due  to  the  model  of  the  Dominican  Order.1  Cer- 
tainly the  character  which  its  representative  spirit  adopted 
runs  parallel  in  point  of  time  with  the  evolution  of  Dominican 
government.  The  Spaniards  are  credited  with  having,  though 
merely  rudimentarily,  begun  the  tradition  of  calling  repre- 
sentatives of  the  towns  into  the  national  assembly,  so  that  it 
is  quite  possible  that  S.  Dominic  himself  may  have  been 
preliminarily  impressed  by  the  customs  of  his  own  country. 

Certainly  the  principle  of  elective  government  was  the 
personal    contribution    of   S.    Dominic  to   the  constitutional 

1  E.  Barker,  Dominican  Order  and  Convocation,  1913,  Oxford. 


1Ro£al  Confessors  127 

experiment  of  government  of  the  Friars  Preachers.  Each 
priory  has  by  Dominican  law  the  right  to  elect  its  own  prior, 
and  the  priors  in  chapter,  together  with  a  representative 
from  each  community,  elected  solely  and  directly  for  this 
purpose,  have  the  right  to  choose  the  provincial;  while  the 
provincials  again,  with  a  representative  from  the  Province, 
elected  solely  and  directly  for  this  purpose,  have  the  right  to 
choose  in  chapter  the  Master-General  of  the  whole  Order.  A 
few  friars,  laureated  either  for  professorial  or  for  preaching 
eminence,  are  privileged  also  to  attend  the  Provincial  Chapters 
and  to  take  part  in  the  election,  yet  on  the  whole  it  may 
be  asserted  that  the  principles  of  representation  and  elective 
government  are  part  of  the  Dominican  constitution. 

Now  the  representative  system  itself  was  a  slow  develop- 
ment and  came  into  prominence  in  the  thirteenth  century. 
The  Cistercians  had  inaugurated  a  government  by  assemblies 
from  the  daughter  abbeys,  which  met  at  Citeaux,  and  as 
such  had  acted  in  defiance  of  the  more  primitive  system  of 
S.  Benedict,  which  supposed  the  complete  autonomy  of  each 
several  abbey  ;  but  the  Roman  authorities  considered  that 
some  such  assemblies  were  necessary  to  keep  life  even  and 
alert  among  the  Benedictines  themselves,  and  actually  in- 
sisted on  it  by  a  decree  of  the  Council  of  the  Lateran  in  12 15, 
in  which  it  was  suggested  that  the  White  Monks  should  send 
an  abbot  to  each  chapter  of  Black  Monks  in  order  to  initiate 
them  into  the  working  of  the  system.  But  it  does  not  appear 
that  very  much  was  done. 

S.  Dominic,  however,  was  in  Rome  during  the  council, 
and  as  a  familiar  friend  of  many  at  the  Roman  Court  knew 
of  the  ideals  and  tendencies  of  Pope  Innocent  III  and  his 
party,  and  found  them  coinciding  with  his  temperamental  and 
national  prejudices,  thereby  confirming  what  must  have  been 
till  then  merely  a  suggestion.  In  any  case  the  original  notion 
of  a  religious  Order  as  world-wide  as  the  Church  and  wider 
than  the  limits  of  Christendom,  and  yet  governed  with  a 
stronger  centralized  government  more  intimately  and  per- 
sonally in  touch  with  its  several  units,  was  made  more  ad- 
venturous but  more  ideal  by  basing  it  on  the  principles  of 
elective  and  representative  government. 

Simultaneously  the  growth  of  Parliaments  all  over  Europe 
which  in  England  and  Hungary,  owing  to  a  variety  of  causes, 
assumed  more  mature  and  practical  results,  coincided  in  its 
new  richness  of  experiment  with  the  twin  foundations  of  the 
Dominican  provinces  of  England  and  Hungary  in  1221,  the 
two  foundations  made  from  the  final  and  most  developed 
stage  of  S.  Dominic's  theories.  Here  arrived  friars  formed  in 
this  last  school,  and  at  once  received  with  open  arms  by 
royal  and  baronial  benefactors.  To  these  were  unfolded  the 
aims  of  this  new  Order,  its  work,  its  motive,  its  organization. 


i28  ube  JEnolisb  Dominicans 

Henry  III  and  Edward  I,  Hubert  de  Burgh  and  De  Mont- 
fort,  seem  to  have  been  in  England  their  best  and  most 
munificent  patrons,  and  these  four,  more  than  any  others,  in- 
fluenced the  formation  of  the  English  Parliament.  Men  like 
John  of  Darlington  were  advising  the  King  in  his  constitu- 
tional struggle  against  the  Barons,  and  De  Montfort,  who 
espoused  the  cause  of  the  Barons,  was  himself  by  descent  and 
actual  family  ties,  as  well  as  by  personal  benefactions,  united 
to  the  Dominican  Order.  It  is  certainly  worth  noting  that  the 
great  royal  experiment  at  liberty  lasted  from  Henry  III  to 
Richard  II,  the  kings  and  the  only  kings  who  had  continuously 
Dominican  confessors. 

Yet  it  is  not  to  be  thought  that  even  the  Dominican  Order 
itself  achieved  its  actual  representative  system  without  pass- 
ing through  all  sorts  of  experiments.  The  idea  first  was  for 
each  priory  to  send  a  prior,  but  the  number  of  representatives 
from  the  community  who  went  along  with  him  to  the  chapter 
was  varied  considerably.  It  was  only  in  1265  that  the  present 
system  was  adopted  whereby  one  delegate  from  the  priory 
accompanies  the  prior;  it  was  also  in  1265  that  finally  two 
delegates  from  the  borough  as  well  as  from  the  counties  were 
summoned  for  De  Montfort's  Parliament.  That  date,  there- 
fore, synchronizes  both  in  English  and  in  Dominican  history 
with  the  representation  of  each  unit  by  two  of  its  members. 
Was  this  a  mere  coincidence,  or  had  it  a  deeper  significance? 
Without  asserting  any  definite  proof,  the  presumption  in 
favour  of  Dominican  ideals  influencing  the  English  states- 
men of  the  reigns  of  Henry  III  and  Edward  I  is  exceedingly 
strong,  and  will  have  an  especially  increased  force  for  those 
historic  critics  to  whom  the  Crown  rather  than  the  Baronage 
has  always  represented  the  liberating  force  in  English  politics. 

Democratic  in  principle,  aristocratic  by  connection,  the 
Order  of  Preaching  Friars  in  its  full  activity  in  England, 
advising,  absolving,  negotiating,  must  directly  and  indirectly 
be  recognized  as  a  powerful  influence.  Up  till  now  this  influ- 
ence of  the  English  Blackfriars  has  been  wholly  ignored. 


CHAPTER  VII 
OBSERVANCE 

IN  an  earlier  chapter  an  attempt  was  made  to  describe 
with  some  detail  the  manner  of  life  in  an  old-time 
Dominican  priory.  Obviously  all  that  could  be  done 
was  to  lay  down,  at  least  for  the  most  part,  the  rules 
and  regulations  considered  of  obligation  without 
waiting  to  notice  whether  these  were  really  observed  or  not. 
As  a  consequence  it  must  be  admitted  that  the  result  stood 
rather  in  the  nature  of  an  ideal  than  of  actual  fulfilment. 
Necessarily  this  must  be  so,  for  it  is  impossible  even  in  con- 
temporary life  to  describe  the  general  actions  of  humanity 
from  their  ethical  standpoint,  since  the  motive  of  these  actions, 
which  in  ethics  is  of  capital  importance,  is  of  its  nature  hidden 
and  elusive.  Looking  backward,  the  effect  is  in  some  ways 
made  easier  in  so  far  as  at  a  distance  impressions  are  simpler, 
but  in  others  harder  in  so  far  as  the  requisite  knowledge  to 
resurrect  conditions  of  past  existence  is  difficult  to  acquire. 
Thus  it  happens  that  writers  steeped  in  literature  of  a  par- 
ticular epoch,  learned  in  its  customs,  acquainted  with  its 
highways  and  by-ways,  will  differ  profoundly  in  their  general 
judgements.  The  monastic  life  of  mediaeval  England  is  a 
fine  case  in  point,  since  judicious  critics  quarrel  with  each 
other's  valuation,  and  one  will  assert  as  typical  what  is  to 
another  abnormal.  Impartiality  cannot  really  be  achieved  in 
writing  since  it  cannot  be  present  in  reading.  No  historian 
can  dare  flatter  himself  that  his  judgement  is  absolute,  though 
the  facts  he  has  collated  may  well  exhaust  present  sources 
of  knowledge.  Particularly  will  this  be  true  of  a  domestic 
historian,  since  he  will  be  influenced  as  often  to  under- 
estimate as  to  overvalue.  The  ideal  and  the  real !  Who  shall 
describe  both  accurately  in  himself  or  in  another  ?  To  one 
temperament  the  proverb  may  be  aptly  applied  that  self- 
praise  is  no  recommendation ;  to  another  the  warning  may 
be  often  needed  that  no  man  is  a  hero  to  his  valet.  On  the 
whole  it  is  worse  to  be  too  cruel  than  too  kind,  since  Heine's 
familiar  reproof  is  most  just:  "  No  man  is  a  hero  to  his  own 
valet,  but  this  is  not  because  the  hero  is  no  hero,  but  because 
the  valet  is  a  valet." 

It  is  usual,  as  a  presumption  in  favour  of  the  excellence  of 
a  society  or  body,  to  quote  the  illustrious  people  who  have 
willingly  joined  it ;  though  perhaps  this  is  not  quite  fair  since 
it  is  necessary  to  remember  that  often  it  is  merely  the  ideal 
life  and  not  its  actual  representatives  that  have  proved  most 
attractive.  Men  and  women  join  societies  and  bodies  just  as 
frequently  for  their  ideal  purposes  as  for  the  successful  real- 
ization of  these  by  the  actual  members.  Certainly  all  through 
the  history  of  the  English  Province  men  of  eminence  con- 

K 


130  XTbe  Bnglisb  Dominicans 

tinued  to  enter  its  ranks.  Bishop  Walter  Mauclerk x  of 
Carlisle  and  the  Abbot  of  Walden,  both  in  the  thirteenth 
century  and  within  twenty  years  of  the  arrival  of  the  Preach- 
ing- Friars,  put  on  the  white  habit  of  S.  Dominic,  though 
Matthew  Paris,  with  his  monkish  disdain  and  his  journalistic 
delight  in  gossip,  supplies  as  their  motives  for  this  that  the 
Bishop  had  fallen  foul  of  Court  favour  and  the  Abbot  fled 
from  the  piled-up  debts  he  had  accumulated.  Though  not 
actual  members  of  the  Province,  both  S.  Richard  Wyche, 
Bishop  of  Chichester,  and  Ralph  of  Maidstone,  Bishop  of 
Hereford  (1234),  had  vowed  to  become  Dominicans  and  were 
counted  as  Preaching  Friars.  Probably  in  modern  terminology 
they  would  to-day  be  spoken  of  as  Tertiaries.  Then  others, 
some  of  them  of  curious  antecedents  yet  well-known  char- 
acters in  their  day,  joined  the  Province.  Bartholomew,  a 
natural  son  of  King  John,  was  an  English  Dominican,  though 
nothing  is  known  of  him  beyond  papal  bulls  permitting  him 
to  accept  a  bishopric  (despite  his  bar  sinister),  and  nominat- 
ing him  the  Pope's  chaplain.  These  speak  of  his  worth, 
learning,  and  piety,  but  as  they  also  describe  his  father  as 
of  "illustrious  memory,"  it  is  rather  difficult  to  put  much 
faith  in  them."  Geoffrey  of  Gerville,  uncle  of  Joan,  the  wife 
of  Roger  Mortimer,  first  Earl  of  March,  handed  over  his 
estates  to  his  nephew-by-marriage  and  became  a  Dominican. 
But  of  him  again  nothing  else  hardly  seems  known.3  Again 
Humphrey,  fourth  Earl  of  Hereford,  whose  wife  was  Eliza- 
beth, one  of  the  daughters  of  Edward  I  (the  widow  of  John, 
Earl  of  Holland),  is  described  as  a  Dominican,  but  the  only 
justification  for  this  seems  to  be  his  burial  among  the  Black- 
friars  of  York.4  Robert  Holcot,  a  famous  Dominican  preacher, 
and  professor  both  at  Oxford  and  Cambridge,  was  a  lawyer 
of  some  eminence  before  he  exchanged  for  white  wool  his 
whiter  ermine ;  and  among  the  titled  friars  of  the  Province 
was  Sir  Robert  Erpingham,  whose  family  so  magnificently 
benefited  the  priory  of  Norwich,5  and  Sir  Henry  Arnold  of 
Dunwich.0 

Yet  even  had  these  friars,  for  their  contemporaries  dis- 
tinguished and  illustrious,  been  more  numerous  and  of 
greater  fame,  the  list  of  them  would  be  of  comparative  un- 
importance, since  from  it  no  convincing  proof  could  be 
gathered  in  favour  of  the  Province.  Moreover,  it  is  patent 
to  anyone  who  possesses  the  least  knowledge  of  mediaeval 
English  literature  that  the  friars  as  a  whole  were  not  popular. 
Chaucer  represents  perhaps  humour  even  more  than  truth,  and 

1  Mat.  Paris,  vol.  iii,  p.  564;  vol.  iv,  pp.  163,  164. 

3  Bull.,  vol.  i,  pp.  220,  234,  253. 

2  Diet.  N.  B.,  vol.  xxxix,  p.  136. 

4  Yorkshire  Archaeological  Journal,  1881,  p.  20. 

5  Reliquary,  1888,  p.  211.  *  Ibid.,  18S6,  p.  211. 


©bsen>ance  131 

picks  his  characters  to  suit  this  dominant  motive.  Wycliffe, 
again,  is  prejudiced  at  least  towards  the  end  of  his  life,  though 
earlier  his  respect  and  admiration  for  the  Franciscans  are 
charmingly  expressed,  and  even  later  his  imitation  of  their 
ideals,  practices,  and  habit  may  justly  be  taken  as  sincerest 
flattery.  The  indictment  of  monkish  historians  equally  may 
be  explained  away  on  the  count  of  jealousy,  arising  from  the 
successful  venture  of  a  rival  order.  But  the  consensus  of  all 
can  hardly  have  been  without  foundation.  To  have  become 
so  unpopular  argues  against  the  friars  something  more  than 
mere  personal  antagonism. 

Moreover,  during  the  period  from  the  thirteenth  to  the 
sixteenth  centuries  commissions  of  Oyer  and  Terminer  had 
to  be  held  to  determine  the  causes  and  extent  of  damage 
done  by  mob  violence  to  Dominican  priories.  Not  all  the 
priories  are  mentioned;  in  fact  Boston,1  Derby,2  and  War- 
wick 3  are  practically  the  only  centres  of  disturbance ;  but 
the  results  show  that  even  locally  opposition  to  the  friars  was 
strong  enough  at  times  to  get  amazingly  out  of  hand.  Bos- 
ton especially  was  incredibly  rowdy ;  though  at  first  it  was 
only  by  the  haphazard  of  a  wayward  wind  that  the  Dominican 
priory  was  burnt.  Sir  Robert  Chamberlain  was  out  to  rob 
while  the  annual  fair  was  being  held,  and  only  set  fire  to  the 
booths  so  as  the  more  easily  in  the  confusion  to  make  off 
with  his  booty  to  the  ships  that  he  had  got  ready  for  escape. 
With  true  mediaeval  irreverence  he  had  dressed  his  men  as 
Canons  Regular  and  monks,  and  had  sent  them  thwacking 
each  other  down  the  narrow  streets  (since  brawls  between 
these  two  Orders  were  evidently  so  common  as  to  occasion 
little  suspicion),  in  and  out  of  the  booths  and  stalls,  killing 
and  stealing,  and  finally  setting  the  whole  ablaze.  But  for 
all  the  confusion  of  it,  Sir  Robert  was  captured,  confessed, 
and  was  hanged.  This  was  in  1288,  but  the  same  sort  of 
thing  recurs  in  1302,  1345,  1379.  That  is  evidence  no  doubt 
of  the  state  of  the  town,  where  foreign  and  sailor  elements 
may  have  contributed  a  great  deal  to  the  want  of  discipline, 
and  where  perhaps  the  spirit  of  mischief  was  ruling,  and 
not  a  mere  anti-clerical  mob  feeling.  Certainly  in  1345  the 
mob  was  led  by  John  Barrett,  the  parson  of  Boston,  and 
Roger  of  Pikeworth,  who  is  described  in  the  official  account 
as  the  "  Chaplain."  Besides  material  damage  to  the  house  to 
the  extent  of  £100,  Friar  Simon,  O.P.,  was  so  terribly  be- 
laboured that  his  life  was  despaired  of.  At  Derby  a  year 
earlier  the  rioters,  who  cut  down  and  carried  off  newly 
planted  trees  from  the  Dominican  garden,  included  two 
chaplains  besides  the  regular  list  of  shoemakers  and  sadlers. 
What  can  have   been  the    reason   for  this  storied  jealousy 

1   Reliquary,  1881,  pp.  87,  88,  89.  2  Ibid.,  1877,  p.  19. 

3   Transactions  of  Birmingham  and  Midland  Institute,  1880,  p.  7. 


13*  XTbe  Ewjltsb  Dominicans 

between  chaplains  and  friars  ?  No  wonder  John  Langland 
warns  the  latter  that: 

Unless  they  and  the  Church  keep  closer  together 
The  most  mischief  e'er  yet  will  be  mounting  up  fast. 

But  in  1379  some  discontented  Dominicans  in  full  habit 
were  themselves  among"  the  attacking  party.  Knowing  well 
their  way  about,  and  evidently  having  old  scores  to  pay  off, 
they  climbed  the  walls  and  jumping  into  the  garden  broke 
down  the  doors  and  crashed  through  the  windows.  The  prior 
and  most  of  the  good  fathers  were  dozing  after  their  mid- 
night office,  so  that  in  bed  they  were  set  on,  insulted  and 
beaten.  The  constables  tried  to  resist  the  furious  mob,  but 
their  efforts  were  only  finally  successful  by  the  time  most  of 
whatever  valuables  there  were  in  the  priory  had  been  seized 
and  carted  off.  That  these  things  should  have  happened  time 
and  time  again  points  to  the  unpopularity  of  the  friars,  at 
least  in  certain  localities.  Even  at  King's  Langley,  where  the 
friars  must  have  been  the  real  Lords  of  the  Manor,  strife 
occurs,  though  it  is  almost  humorous  to  note  that  Guy 
Ducheman  bringing  his  action  in  the  court  leet  against 
Roger,  the  prior's  servant,  especially  accuses  him  of  striking 
and  wounding  and  ill-treating  him  with  a  stick  of  no  value. 
To  be  hit  by  the  prior's  servant  with  a  stick  of  no  value  was 
surely  insult  and  injury  indeed,  and  not  to  be  borne.1 

Again,  another  symptom  of  failure  was  the  persistent  royal 
precept  to  sheriffs  to  arrest  and  restrain  "apostates."  An 
apostate  was  not  necessarily  one  who  had  renounced  his  faith, 
but  merely  a  friar  who  after  having  passed  his  first  year  in 
the  Order  had  been  professed  solemnly,  and  then  had  thrown 
off  his  habit,  or  even  still  in  his  Dominican  garb  bolted  out 
of  his  priory  without  permission,  restless  souls  in  large 
numbers  at  times,  tired  of  discipline,  or  personally  antagon- 
istic to  the  actual  superior,  finding  religious  life  insupport- 
able, and  having  no  profession  or  work  to  which  they  could 
settle.  Even  the  preaching  and  begging  life  itself  made  some 
feel  too  straitly  the  restrictions  of  conventual  life.  One  shrewd 
critic  thus  justifies  his  position  canonically: 

Out  of  the  Order  thereof  I  begone 

Apostata  neer  am  I  none, — 

Of  twelves  monthes  me  wanted  one 

And  odd  days  nine  or  ten — 
Away  to  wend  I  made  me  bown 
E'er  time  came  of  profession 
I  went  my  way  through  all  the  town 

In  sight  of  many  men. 

He  was  no  "  apostate,"  for  he  had  left  the  Order  before  his 
first  year  was  complete,  and  had  therefore  never  "  made  pro- 
fession "  of  the  religious  life. 

1  B.M.  Had.  MSS.,  6005,  fol.  55. 


Observance  133 

These  royal  writs  and  precepts  against  apostates  are  very 
frequent,  at  least  twenty-three  being-  issued  against  wander- 
ing- Dominicans  between  1240  and  1538.  This  again,  in  estim- 
ating the  spiritual  value  of  the  English  Province,  cannot  be 
ignored  as  a  symptom  of  the  want  of  observance  of  the 
Dominican  ideals.  Dissatisfaction  is  far  more  often  occa- 
sioned among  religious  by  the  absence  of  strict  life  than  by 
an  excess  of  it,  though  both  extremes  are  obviously  per- 
nicious. Sometimes  the  writ  or  precept  will  vaguely  hint, 
sometimes  definitely  state,  more  often  be  wholly  silent  about 
the  cause  of  apostasy.  Public  money  has  been  stolen  from 
the  Exeter  priory,  and  a  friar  has  disappeared.  Apostasy  is 
here  definitely  linked  to  crime.1  As  a  matter  of  fact  in  this 
particular  case  there  was  no  apostasy  at  all,  for  the  culprit 
had  been  carefully  put  in  the  priory  prison  by  the  prior  who 
pretended  (to  save  him  from  a  worse  fate)  that  he  could  not 
be  found.  Three  priors  of  Exeter  in  succession  were  impli- 
cated in  this  fraud,  but  at  the  instance  of  the  provincial, 
Robert  Bromyard,  and  of  Hugh  of  Manchester,  they  received 
in  1305  Edward's  royal  pardon.2  What  fate  befell  Stephen 
of  Exeter,  O.P. ,  after  his  eight  years  in  prison,  no  entry  in 
the  royal  books  yet  records.  Hugh  Lea  of  London,  another 
O.P.  apostate,  was  merely  technically  so;  he  was  trying  to 
make  a  pilgrimage  to  Compostella,  but  getting  no  leave  from 
anyone,  was  starting  out  on  his  own  sole  authority.  Royal 
officials  pounced  on  him,  and  sequestered  his  books  and 
money,  but  were  made  to  disgorge  their  booty  in  1381.'  In 
1396  another  apostate,  by  name  John  Edmunton  of  London, 
was  to  be  arrested  that  he  might  answer  for  himself  before 
the  Council  and  the  Chancellor;  he  was  said  to  be  a  messenger 
from  the  Master-General,  but  was  strongly  suspected  by  the 
Court  of  being  a  spy.'  In  1400  John  Ketylby  was  removed 
from  imprisonment  at  Oxford  to  London,  where  the  friars 
once  more  placed  him  in  their  custody.5  He,  too,  is  spoken  of 
as  an  apostate.  Usually  the  writs  and  royal  precepts  are 
more  general,  and  imply  the  existence  of  a  wandering  band 
of  friars  without  licence  or  authority  or  purpose,  begging, 
and  occasionally  no  doubt  throwing  their  eloquence  and 
priestly  influence  into  any  local  upheaval  or  revolt  which 
momentarily  gave  them  opportunity  for  mischief.  Thus  the 
spirit  of  disturbance  was  kept  alive  and  active.  Political 
agitators  found  them  useful  and  drew  into  their  camp  some 
prominent  friar.  Usually,  owing  to  their  general  devotion  to 
the  royal  cause,  the  Dominicans  are  found  in  support  of  dis- 
possessed kings,  and  the  entries  about  1327  and  1399  are 
exceptionally  heavy  with   notices   of  imprisonment,  a  testi- 

1  Reliquary,  1886,  p.  255.       a  Ibid.       3  P.R.O.  R.  C,  4  Rich.  II,  m.  18. 

4  P.R.O.  R.  P.,  20  Rich.  II,  m.  28  dorso. 

5  P.R.O.  R.  de  Z.,  9  Edvv.  Ill,  m.  8. 


134  'Ebe  JEnglisfo  Dominicans 

mony  at  least  to   the  gratitude,  if  not  to  the  wisdom,  of  the 
Province. 

But  the  fullest  story  of  all  centres  round  1314.1  Murimuth, 
in  his  Chronicle,  reports  that  while  the  General  Chapter  sat 
that  year  in  London  a  long-  list  of  accusations  against  the 
Order  was  affixed  one  night  to  the  doors  of  S.  Paul's.  That 
was  on  26  May.  A  royal  precept  to  the  Sheriff  of  Oxfordshire 
on  1  October  following,  mentions  a  band  of  wandering  friars 
who,  by  means  of  pamphlets  and  public  notices,  were  doing 
their  best  to  arouse  mob  violence  against  the  English 
Dominicans.  From  an  earlier  writ  of  18  September,  issued 
to  the  Mayor  and  Sheriffs  of  the  City,  and  a  third  issued  to 
all  the  sheriffs  of  the  kingdom,  dated  21  September,  we  find 
that  some  of  the  band  still  retained  their  habits,  while  others 
had  changed  into  lay  attire.  Moreover,  the  name  of  their 
leader  is  given,  Friar  Simon  of  Sydolvesmere.  We  can  even 
dig  out  a  catalogue  of  the  enormities  with  which  this  band 
charged  the  responsible  rulers  of  the  Province,  and  which, 
indeed,  was  sufficiently  grave  and  serious  to  have  required 
some  sort  of  commission  of  inquiry.  None  seems  to  have 
been  held,  though  the  Master-General,  the  Chapter,  and  the 
Provincial  were  all  advertised  of  the  facts,  and  the  Pope,  the 
Primate,  and  the  King  received  letters  of  appeal.  The  only 
possible  solution  is  that  the  characters  of  Simon  and  his 
hundred  (such  is  the  number  he  claims)  friars  were  considered 
sufficient  to  nullify  any  amount  of  accusations  and  affidavits, 
for  the  accusations  are  so  horrible  that  their  only  parallel  in 
black  wickedness  is  the  equally  unjustifiable  charges  against 
the  Knights  Templars  almost  at  the  same  date.  These  charges 
may  be  summarized  in  form  : 

(1)  That  the  friars  in  prison  were  persecuted  till  they  had 
become  mad  or  were  even  driven  to  suicide  or  actually 
killed.  Did  this  last  happen,  lest  coroners  might  be 
introduced  and  the  sad  state  of  the  confined  friars  be  dis- 
covered, false  bodies  were  made,  their  approaching  end 
was  lyingly  noised  abroad,  and  to  keep  up  the  pretence 
the  regular  processions  took  place  with  litanies  and 
psalms  sung,  candles  carried,  and  even  the  Blessed 
Sacrament  borne,  though  all  the  while  the  supposed  sick 
were  actually  dead. 

(2)  That  the  sanitary  conditions  of  the  dungeons  were  abso- 
lutely fatal  to  human  life. 

(3)  That  nothing  was  done  at  all  for  those  that  fell  sick, 
though  the  Constitutions  were  always  clear  on  the 
necessity  of  looking  after  everyone  who  was  ill. 

(4)  That  when  the  imprisoned  were  penitent  and  demanded 

1  P.R.O.  R.  P.,  8  Edw.  II,  p.  1,  m.  22,  m.  21,  m.  7;  B.M.  Add.  MSS., 
5444,  fol.  223;   Chronicon  of  Murium  th  (E.  H.  S. ),  p.  22. 


©bserv>ance  135 

forgiveness,  the  Sacraments,  at  least  the  Holy  Eucharist, 
were  denied  them,  and  no  breviary  was  permitted,  so 
that  the  consolations  and  even  obligations  of  the  reli- 
gious state  found  no  entrance  behind  the  cell  doors. 

It  seems  more  frank  to  give  absolutely  the  accusations  made, 
so  as  to  show  wherein  religious  life  may  be  said  to  have  failed 
among  the  English  Dominicans,  though,  of  course,  at  this 
distance  of  time  it  is  impossible  to  pretend  to  sift  out  the 
evidence  for  and  against  the  responsible  authorities.  But  it 
is  necessary  to  note  that  no  voice  is  lifted  against  the  system, 
nor  is  it  contended  that  anyone  was  unjustly  imprisoned,  nor 
that  the  conventual  prison  should  be  discarded.  The  charges, 
though  horrible  to  read  even  after  this  distance  of  time, 
attack  the  mere  administration  of  a  system  against  which  no 
one  contended.  Even  these  charges  evoke  no  sympathy  from 
King  or  Pope,  or  Primate  or  Master,  or  Chapter  or  Pro- 
vincial, and  this  must  suppose  some  inherent  defect  in  the 
presentment  of  the  case.  Appeals  here  could  not  have  been 
ignored  in  this  matter  because  of  the  want  of  gravity  in  the 
charge,  only,  therefore,  because  of  the  untrustworthiness  of  the 
evidence.  But  it  seems  clear  that  in  this  case  the  evidence  was 
not  sifted,  only  the  character  of  the  witness  taken  into  account. 

William  of  Hassefield,  apostate,  was  imprisoned  by  the  Con- 
stable in  Gloucester,  but  when  attempts  were  made  to  transfer 
him,  as  Canon  Law  required,  to  the  custody  of  the  friars,  since 
no  secular  court  had  jurisdiction  over  spiritual  persons,  the 
mob  threatened  to  break  into  the  priory  and  rescue  him.  Here 
again  we  have  no  clue  to  the  reason  for  William's  popularity. 
The  date  was  1338,  the  neighbourhood,  Berkeley  Castle.  Was 
this  another  effort  on  the  part  of  the  Dominicans  to  set  up 
again  their  dear  Edward  II,  whom  not  even  yet  could  the 
people  believe  to  have  been  done  to  death?1  Edward  II  had 
sent  to  the  Pope  in  13 18  another  friar,  William  of  Brotherton, 
who  was  intensely  worried  over  some  irregularity  committed 
when  he  was  still  a  boy.2  The  King's  letter  accompanying  the 
friar  is  vigorously  human  and  friendly,  leaving  to  an  actual 
interview  the  specification  of  the  thing  done.  No  wonder 
apostates  and  penitents  as  well  as  officials  of  the  Province 
cherished  the  memory  of  the  poor  dead  King. 

But  there  were  many  conditions  which  went  to  make  the 
strict  observance  of  religious  life  a  very  difficult  thing.  Some- 
times the  King  would  lodge  with  the  friars,  as  at  Newcastle 
m  I3353  or  Stamford  in  1332,  sometimes  Parliament  met 
within  the  walls,  as  at  Oxford  in  1258  or  Cambridge  in  1388. 
The  royal  exchequer  paid  well  for  these  interruptions,  but  the 

1  P.R.O.  R.  C,  12  Edw.  Ill,  p.  1,  m.  12  dorso. 
-  P.R.O.  R.  R.  et  F.,  11-14  Edw.  II,  m.  11  dorso. 
P.R.O.    R.  E.  S.  Pasch.,   6  Edw.   Ill,  m.  4;  B.M.   Cotton  Nero,  viii; 
L.  G.,  8,  9,  io,  11  Edw.  III. 


136  Zbc  JBrxQlish  Dominicans 

very  sums  expended  for  "damages"  done  by  Court  and 
Commons  are  evidence  of  the  grave  interference  that  must 
have  taken  place  in  the  cloistral  peace  and  quiet.  The  Queen 
of  Edward  IV  stayed  at  Shrewsbury  in  the  guest  apartments 
long  enough  to  give  birth  to  two  of  her  children  ;  those  months 
meant  a  retinue,  none  too  well  ordered,  for  whose  evil 
behaviour  the  King  was  bound  to  pay.  Even  wool  was  stored 
in  the  priory  at  Derby  and  allowed  by  the  receiver  to  rot;  no 
very  pleasant  intimate  neighbour  in  its  decaying  state  for  the 
poor  friars.  Charters  and  records  were  handed  to  the  reli- 
gious to  guard,  who  were  heavily  dealt  with  did  anything 
untoward  befall.  Sir  William  Bagot  graciously  admitted 
himself  satisfied  when  Richard  Runcorn,  Prior  of  Chester,1 
was  put  in  prison  for  refusing  to  surrender  a  chest  committed 
to  him,  which  contained  charters  touching  Sir  William's 
heritage.  In  1442  Sir  Simon  Felbrigge  leaves  his  bed  of  silk, 
red  and  white,  to  Thomas  Pendall  when  the  said  Thomas  shall 
have  come  of  age;  "  in  the  meantime  the  aforesaid  bed  is  to 
be  kept  by  my  executors  in  the  house  of  the  Friars  Preachers 
of  Norwich."2  Now  really  imagine  religious  life  lived  in  such 
difficult  conditions.  Not  only  may  kings  and  Parliament  come 
with  all  their  rout  and  settle  for  days  and  weeks  within  the  limits 
of  the  monastery,  not  only  are  charters  and  documents  stored 
there,  but  anyone  apparently  without  a  by-your-leave  can 
dump  wool  down  in  your  storerooms  till  it  rots,  or  bequeath 
beds  to  be  left  under  your  roof  till  little  boys  come  of  age. 
Then  after  all  these  multiplied  vexations,  when  the  friars  break 
out  to  secluded  spots  and  take  over  country  livings  in  order  to 
secure  peace  and  quiet,  or  endeavour  to  rouse  the  peasantry 
for  some  political  ideal  or  even  intrigue,  then  any  poet  or 
preacher  of  heresy  or  gossiping  monastic  chronicler  solemnly 
takes  up  the  burden  of  remonstrance  and  insists  on  the  import- 
ance of  religious  life. 

Then  the  King  complains  because  he  cannot  get  the  English 
friars  to  accept  endowments  as  contrary  to  their  ideals  of 
poverty,  so  Edward  II  writes  to  the  Pope  for  a  dispensation  in 
the  matter  for  his  priory  of  King's  Langley,  adducing  as  his 
reason  that  the  community  there  never  has  enough  to  eat.1 
They  beg  for  food,  and  Chaucer  scorns  them  for  their  wander- 
ing lives,  and  Fitz-Ralph  denounces  them  as  "sturdy  beggars." 
It  is  probably  true  that  in  fact  it  was  the  necessity  for  begging 
that  most  broke  up  their  discipline  and  ruined  the  cloistral 
peace  of  many  an  ordinary  soul ;  but  the  necessity  was 
inspired  by  a  noble  ideal,  to  lower  which  seemed  like  apostasy. 
Their  food,  indeed,  could  not  have  been  a  matter  of  much 
reproach,  for  their  presents  from  the  King  and  other  bene- 
factors are  chiefly  pike  and  herrings  and  "  graytes  of  figs." 

1  Reliquary,  1882,  p.  100.  2  Wills,  P.C.C.,  14  Rous. 

3  Reliquary,  1878,  p.  38. 


Observance  137 

In  1374  they  are  allowed  by  Papal  dispensation,  when  at  the 
houses  of  seculars,  to  take  meat,  "  lest  they  become  a  burden 
to  their  hosts,"1  though  there  is  no  single  allusion  in  all  the 
extant  documents,  neither  in  the  progresses  of  royal  con- 
fessors, nor  in  the  list  of  pittances  sent  in,  nor  in  the  wills  of 
munificent  friends  of  any  gift  of  meat  or  game.  Wine  came 
their  way,  since  wine  was  required  for  altar  as  well  as  for 
table;  but  the  evidence  at  present  procurable,  admittedly 
fragmentary  as  it  is,  nowhere  bears  out  any  such  charge  of 
greed.  Even  the  presents  they  give  to  the  King  are  chiefly 
apples  and  pears  from  Chelmsford  and  Norwich,  and  beer  from 
King's  Langley. 

Poverty  seems  on  the  whole  to  have  been  observed,  since 
Edward  II  protested  to  the  Pope  against  the  strict,  even 
narrow,  interpretation  put  on  their  vows  by  the  friars  of 
King's  Langley.  Indeed,  to  others  than  to  Edward,  to  critics 
as  well  as  benefactors,  it  was  poverty  itself,  and  still  more  the 
begging  which  it  necessitated,  that  caused  a  decline  in  the 
vigour  and  efficiency  of  the  Order.  The  wandering  life  led  to 
restlessness,  to  slipshod,  untidy  habits  of  thought,  to  the 
relaxation  of  conventual  discipline.  The  priory  at  Canterbury 
quite  early  on  in  the  story  of  the  Province  became  burdened 
with  debts,  which,  while  harassing  the  existence  of  the  friars, 
forced  them  to  perpetual  brooding  upon  the  importance  of 
wealth,  a  fixed  idea  which  does  not  tend  to  elevation  of 
thought.  In  1373,  on  30  October,  a  royal  decree  absolved 
the  Dominican  Prior  of  Stamford  from  all  writs  of  restraint 
and  debt  against  him,  as  these  had  been  contracted  by  his 
community  without  his  leave  or  knowledge.2  There  was, 
indeed,  just  one  occasion  when  the  friars  did  attempt  to  make 
a  little  money,  but  this  only  provoked  the  fury  of  the  King. 
Edward  III  gave  the  Dominicans  of  Northampton  some  houses 
adjoining  their  priory  in  order  to  enlarge  their  buildings. 
These,  however,  they  promptly  let  out  to  tenants.  Edward 
was  furious,  and  took  them  back  into  his  own  hands,  restoring 
them,  however,  in  1358  on  condition  that  the  land  was  used 
solely  for  the  purpose  he  had  intended  and  was  not  let  out  on 
lease.3 

Whatever  may  have  been  their  lack  of  popularity  among  the 
people,  the  English  Dominicans  have  no  record  of  cruelty  or 
inquisitorial  tortures  against  them,  but  rather  all  through 
their  history  they  intervened  in  favour  of  those  already  con- 
demned to  the  extreme  penalty  of  the  law.  Even  in  1236  a 
murderer,  William  Ruffo,4  who  had  caused  the  death  of 
Gilbert  Monser,  and  having  fled  had  been  sentenced  as  an 
outlaw,  was  declared  free  from  molestation  as  in  the  mean- 

1   Leland,  vol.  ii,  p.  308. 

a  Reliquary,  1881,  p.  138.  3  Ibid.,  1880,  pp.  27,  28. 

4  P.R.O.  R.  P.,  20  Hen.  Ill,  m.  10. 


i38  ftbe  Bnglisb  Dominicans 

while  he  had  become  a  Dominican.  Murderers,  indeed, 
seem  to  have  developed  an  instinctive  devotion  to  the 
children  of  S.  Dominic,  or  else  the  children  of  S.  Dominic 
took  upon  themselves  the  task  of  interceding  for  murderers. 
At  the  instance  of  the  friars  of  Oxford,  John  Preston  and 
Walter  of  Essenden  were  pardoned  for  outlawry  in  1264;1 
Gerard  Troffin  of  Ypres  and  Peter  Fauconberg  of  St.  Omer, 
for  the  murder  of  Robert  Thorold  of  Lynn  were  pardoned  at 
the  instance  of  John  of  Darlington  in  1266;^  at  the  instance  of 
Thomas  Blundel,  O.P.,  Galfrid  was  pardoned  for  the  murder 
of  John  le  Brateur  in  1265.'  At  the  instance  of  William  of 
Southampton,  Provincial  of  the  English  Dominicans,  in  1278* 
and  of  Richard  Winckley,  O.P. ,  in  13473  other  pardons  were 
granted,  and  a  friar  himself,  Philip  of  Bodnolagh,  was  par- 
doned in  1279s  f°r  some  injury  he  had  done  to  Richard  Nonon 
of  Treleysech. 

However,  on  6  January  1318,7  five  friars  of  Salisbury  (John 
of  Mulford,  WTill  of  Halmerton,  John  of  Bachampton,  Francis 
Aubyn,  John  of  Styntesford)  themselves  needed  and  received 
pardon  for  rescuing  vt et  armis]o\\i\  Fitzwilliam,  who  was  on 
his  way  to  be  hung  for  felony.  They  overset  the  guard,  cut 
the  rope,  and  set  him  free.  In  1327  again  John  of  Stoke,  a 
Warwick  Dominican,"  is  to  be  pursued  by  the  royal  sheriff" 
for  his  delinquencies,  and  if  captured  to  be  carried  before  the 
King.  The  date  is  ominous,  recording  the  last  turmoils  that 
surround  the  tragedy  of  Edward  II.  The  next  civil  war  finds 
friars  again  interested  in  distressed  monarchs,  and  John 
Gaseley,  O.P.,!'  figures  in  a  list  issued  by  Edward  IV  in  1471 
of  proscribed  rebels,  supporters  of  Henry  VI.  Queen  Margaret 
heads  the  roll,  and  Friar  John  almost  ends  it.  In  1494  10  there 
was  a  famous  conspiracy  that  goes  under  the  name  of  its 
leader,  Sir  William  Stanley.  Among  the  leading  members  of 
it,  Hall  in  his  Chronicle  notes:  "  Certain  priests  and  religious 
men  as  Sir  William  Rochford,  doctor  of  divinity,  and  Sir 
Thomas  Poynes,  both  Friars  of  S.  Dominick's  Order."  While 
the  London  Chronicle  under  date  of  the  same  year  states  that 
"the  29th  day  of  January  was  kept  at  the  Guildhall  an  oyer 
determiner  which  lasted  iij  days  where  .  .  .  were  adjudged 
to  be  drawn,  hanged,  heded,  and  quartered  iij  spiritualmen, 
that  is   to  say,   the    Dean   of  Paul's,   the    Provincial  of  the 

1  P.R.O.  R.  P.,  48  Hen.  Ill,  m.  17. 

2  Ibid.,  41  Hen.  Ill,  War.  and  Leic. 
:'  Ibid.,  49  Hen.  Ill,  m.  9. 

4  Ibid.,  6  Edw.  I,  m.  n. 

5  P.R.O.  R.  Cart,  et  P.  apitd  Cales,  21  Edw.  Ill,  m.  22. 

6  P.R.O.  R.  P.,  7  Edw.  I,  m.  9. 

7  Ibid.,  11  Edw.  II,  p.  1,  m.  6. 

8  Ibid.,  1  Edw.  Ill,  p.  2,  m.  24. 

?'  P.R.O.  Durham  Chancery  Rolls,  No.  49  (Bp.  Booth),  m.  4. 
1,1  B.M.  Cotton  MSS.,  Vitellius  A,  vol.  xvi,  fol.  152. 


o 


[To  face  p.  15S 


Observance  *39 

Blackfriars,  a  noble  divine  and  famous  preacher,  and  the 
Prior  of  a  house  of  the  Blackfriars  called  Lang-ley."  Hall 
adds  further  that  the  priests  were  pardoned.  So  frequent 
became  these  interventions  and  so  successful,  in  favour  ot 
outlaws,  murderers,  and  Jews  (the  last  of  which  brought  them 
to  starvation  in  one  place  as  their  defence  of  these  hapless 
folk  was  locally  unpopular),  that  at  last  the  Master-General 
was  moved  to  indignation  and  solemnly  forbade  in  13981  any 
attempts  of  the  English  friars  to  obtain  favours  for  criminals. 
And  certainly  after  that  date  no  other  cases  occur. 

It  will,  however,  be  seen  that  on  the  whole  the  friars  were 
not  unworthy  of  their  high  calling.  Right  at  the  beginning 
of  the  Black  Death  we  find  the  city  of  London  asking  for 
Dominicans  to  be  its  official  guides  in  its  spiritual  life.  A 
petition  still  remains,  dated  2  April  1350,"  which  alludes  to 
the  ravages  made  in  the  city  by  the  plague.  So  many  of  the 
citizens  had  perished,  and  so  many  of  the  priests  had  been 
struck  down  by  it,  that  there  was  a  grave  dread  in  the  city, 
for  men  knew  not  where  to  turn  for  the  help  their  souls 
needed.  In  this  plight  the  Mayor  and  citizens  wrote  to  the 
Pope.  They  asked  that  a  certain  well-known  Dominican,  by 
name  John  of  Worthyn,  should  be  given  faculties  to  absolve 
them  in  all  their  troubles.  Just  one  extract  shall  be  quoted 
as  it  shows  the  reverence  inspired  not  for  this  one  friar  only, 
but  for  the  London  community.  "With  one  accord  there- 
fore," says  this  document,  "with  weeping  eyes  does  your 
congregation  here  entreat  the  most  exalted  highness  of  Your 
Holiness,  that  the  same  Your  Holiness  will  deign  graciously 
to  grant  unto  the  venerable  and  religious  man,  Friar  John  de 
Worthyn,  your  Chaplain,  a  man  of  honour  and  approved  life, 
of  manners  and  of  learning,  sprung  from  the  high  blood  of 
our  realm  who  alone  of  all  others  strengthens  us  with  the  Word 
of  Christ,  and  with  whom,  as  we  believe,  nothing  is  wanting 
that  could  add  to  our  profit,  that  in  every  case  (as  well  cases 
reserved  as  others — unless  the  enormity  of  the  offence  be  such 
that  Your  Holiness  should  of  necessity  have  to  be  consulted 
thereon),  he  and  he  only  within  our  City  may  be  able  to 
absolve  our  people,  being  penitent.  .  .  .  And  further,  if  Your 
Holiness  might  incline  thereto,  that  in  case  the  same  Friar 
John  should  depart  this  life,  the  Prior  of  the  Convent  of  the 
Order  of  Preachers  in  London,  with  the  counsel  and  assent 
of  the  Mayor  of  the  City,  might  be  enabled  to  appoint  a  friar 
of  the  same  Order — that  would  be  at  once  to  us  a  fulfilment 
of  our  wishes." 

Now  this  must  be  placed  opposite  the  wit  of  Chaucer,  the 
sneers   of  Wycliffe,   the   criticism  of  the  monks,  when   final 


1  P.R.O.  R.  C,  22  Rich.  II,  p.  1,  m.  35. 

2  Riley,  Memorials  of  London  and  London  Life,  p.  251 


14°  XTbc  Engltsb  H)omtnicans 

judgement  is  made  by  history  on  the  character  of  the  English 
Province.  Even  the  Black  Death  did  not  wholly  dissipate  its 
strength.  In  food,  in  discipline,  in  poverty,  we  have  already 
cited  sufficiently  to  prove  that  nothing  flagrant  in  any  extant 
record  appears.  Even  the  official  accounts  for  the  expenditure 
of  the  royal  confessors  contain  nothing  bought  or  demanded 
contrary  to  the  rule  or  constitutions.  That  surely  is  remark- 
able. At  a  time  of  great  relaxation  on  the  Continent,  these 
religious  out  of  their  priories  and  away  from  the  supervision 
of  superiors  or  the  conventions  engendered  by  community 
life,  journeying  either  with  the  King  or  on  the  King's  affairs, 
made  no  attempt  to  act  contrary  to  the  regulations  of  their 
Order.  At  other  times  it  would  not  be  matter  for  remark,  but 
at  this  period  when  it  is  confessed  on  all  sides  that  discipline 
abroad  was  very  much  neglected  in  these  things  (witness  the 
evidence  of  S.  Catherine  of  Siena,  B.  Raymund  of  Capua, 
etc.),  it  is  good  to  find  that  the  English  Province  still  prac- 
tised the  strict  observance  of  its  rule.  Even  the  saying  of  the 
Divine  Office,  though  at  first  (to  judge  from  the  stories  of  the 
English  friars  who  in  the  Vitae  Fratnnn  are  perpetually  being 
upbraided  by  Our  Lady  for  their  excessive  speed  in  saying  it) 
perhaps  too  briskly  recited,  was  not  omitted  here,  as  it  is  said 
to  have  been  largely  omitted  elsewhere.  King  Richard  II, 
who  seems  indeed  to  have  been  a  member  of  the  Third  Order, 
received  on  8  September  1395  a  papal  privilege  in  answer  to 
a  request  which  he  had  addressed  to  the  Sovereign  Pontiff. 
On  that  day,  Pope  Boniface  IX  granted  both  to  the  King  and 
to  all  clerics  in  attendance  at  Court,  licence  to  say  the  Divine 
Office  according  to  the  Dominican  use  which  the  Pope  learns 
from  the  royal  petition  to  be  somewhat  different  from  the 
Roman  rite.  Even  those  absent  from  Court  for  not  more  than 
two  months  could  continue  the  same  practice.  The  King  is 
noted  himself  as  using  this  manner  of  prayer.1 

Now  although  this  fact  cannot  rigorously  be  urged  as  a 
proof  that  the  English  friars  themselves  said  their  Office  de- 
voutly, yet  it  is  not  wholly  a  matter  of  special  pleading  to 
assert  that  it  would  not  be  likely  for  the  King  to  have  such  a 
regard  for  the  Dominican  form  of  the  Breviary  unless  he  had 
known  it  from  experience  to  be  a  thing  of  beauty,  or  been 
taught  so  by  his  confessor.  In  either  case  the  fact  that  he 
did  make  use  of  it,  and  that  it  was  said  by  himself  and  all  the 
Court,  shows  that  there  was  a  love  for  the  Dominican  Office 
at  the  royal  Court  fostered  by  the  friars  in  attendance. 

Further,  the  same  impression  of  endeavour  to  live  up  to  a 
high  ideal  is  made  for  that  date  at  least,  when  we  find  that 
Robert  of  Formial  in  1245  had  papal  leave  to  become  an 
Augustinian  as  the  Dominican  life  was  far  too  severe  for  him.2 

1   Bull.,  vol.  ii,  p.  352.  2  Ibid.,  vol.  i,  p.  145. 


Observance  hi 

But  in  1374  begins  a  struggle  which  has  been  fastened  on 
by  certain  French  historians  of  the  Order  of  Preachers  l  as 
implying  a  revolt  among  the  English  friars  against  central 
authority,  a  desire  among  them  to  strike  out  a  new  line  for 
themselves,  a  separatist  tendency,  a  determination  to  show 
that  Englishmen  were  different  from  the  rest  of  the  world 
and  required  special  legislation.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  the  con- 
troversy reveals  that  the  English  friars  had  a  greater  regard 
for  the  observance  of  the  rule  than  was  perhaps  to  be  found 
elsewhere. 

An  attempt  was  made  at  reform  by  the  friars  abroad,  under 
the  leadership  of  B.  Raymund  of  Capua,  the  confessor  of 
S.  Catherine,  who  had  been  elected  to  the  Master-Generalship 
of  that  portion  of  the  Order  which  remained  faithful  to  the 
obedience  of  the  Roman  line  of  Pontiffs.  Raymund  was 
elected  in  the  very  year  of  his  friend's  death,  1380.  At  once 
he  began  to  agitate  for  his  reform.  The  plan  that  seemed  to 
him  the  most  feasible  was  to  establish  in  each  province  one 
house  of  what  was  called  strict  observance.  That  is,  he  set 
up  everywhere  he  could  priories  where  the  absolute  letter 
of  the  Dominican  constitution  was  to  be  carried  into  effect. 
There  was  to  be  no  compulsion  used  to  make  people  enter 
into  these  particular  monasteries.  In  fact,  the  idea  was  to 
attract  to  them  only  just  those  who  had  themselves  the  same 
drawing  to  the  stricter  life  that  consumed  the  soul  of 
Raymund.  By  this  means  the  Saint  hoped  gradually  to  set 
such  a  pattern  up  before  the  Order  as  should  compel  the 
others,  by  the  very  beauty  of  this  the  older  form  of  the 
Dominican  life,  to  give  their  consent  to  the  reform  being 
extended  to  the  whole  Order.  But  of  course,  the  trouble  was 
to  keep  such  houses  up  to  their  original  standard — to  prevent 
their  sinking  back  to  their  old  level.  To  accomplish  this,  it 
was  decreed  that  no  one  was  to  be  sent  elsewhere  who  wished 
to  live  after  this  fashion.  Each  had  the  right  to  choose  this 
form  of  religious  life,  and  to  remain  always  in  this  higher 
atmosphere.  Moreover,  lest  the  unfervent  should  be  placed 
in  authority  over  these  houses  and  endeavour  to  interfere 
with  the  established  discipline,  it  was  further  decreed  that 
these  priories  were  to  be  directly  under  the  General,  or  some 
vicar  appointed  by  him,  and  not  to  be  connected  with  the 
local  provincial.  This,  which  was  looked  on  as  the  safeguard 
of  the  newer  observance,  ultimately  proved  its  ruin,  but  for  the 
moment  it  prevailed. 

The  story  can  be  begun  by  noting  a  royal  decree  that  the 
Chancellor  of  the  University  of  Oxford  was  ordered  by  the 
King,  Edward  III,  in  1369,  to  issue  a  proclamation  to  be  pub- 
lished at  Carfax  whereby  all  foreign  students,  religious  and 

1  Mortier,  vol.  iii,  pp.  648-67. 


i42  Qbc  Bnolisb  Dominicans 

secular,  were  to  be  expelled  from  Oxford.1  This  general 
order  was  probably  a  political  move,  for  Edward  was  in  the 
throes  of  his  French  war,  and  had  no  intention  of  allowing'  an 
organized  spy  system  to  exist  within  his  borders.  At  once 
rebellion  broke  out  in  the  Dominican  priory.  Seventeen 
students,  English  as  well  as  foreign,  revolted,  seized  the 
convent,  and  by  armed  resistance  prevented  the  Provincial 
and  the  local  superior  from  entering  the  building.  The 
gallant  band  was  headed  by  John  of  Chesham,  who  later,  as 
a  solemn  and  dignified  Master  of  Theology,  subscribed  a  con- 
demnation of  the  teaching  of  Wycliffe,  and  as  confessor  to 
Lord  S.  Amand  was  bequeathed  20  marks  under  the  will  of 
that  nobleman  in  1403.2  On  4  May  1370,3  a  royal  mandate  to 
the  Sheriff  of  Oxford,  to  Master  Robert  of  Sustede,  LL.D., 
the  Parson  of  Willingham,  and  to  John  of  Watlington,  the 
royal  sergeant-at-arms,  ordered  them  to  assist  the  Provincial 
in  securing  due  obedience  and  a  peaceable  entrance  into  his 
priory  on  the  island  near  S.  Ebbe's,  and  into  "every  house 
of  the  same  Convent  "  ;  evidently  it  was  barricaded  from  end 
to  end.  That  this  brawl,  despite  the  active  participation  in 
it  of  some  of  the  English  Dominican  students,  was  con- 
nected with  the  anti-foreign  proclamation  at  Carfax  in  the 
year  previous,  seems  clear  from  another  mandate,  18  October 
1373,4  ordering  the  Prior  of  Oxford  to  remove  at  once  all  alien 
enemies  who  had  come  to  the  convent  on  the  pretence  of 
being  Dominicans  engaged  in  study,  since  their  real  object 
was  to  discover  the  plans  of  the  King,  and  to  explore  the 
state  of  the  kingdom  and  to  let  the  King's  enemies  be  ac- 
quainted with  their  information.  Hence  Edward  commands 
them  all  to  be  removed,  until  they  had  been  examined  and 
licensed.  Almost  a  year  later,  to  be  quite  accurate  on 
25  August  1374,5  another  royal  mandate  was  published, 
addressed  to  the  Provincial  of  the  English  friars,  forbidding 
him  to  accept  the  great  number  of  foreign  friars  that  had 
been  sent  to  the  Dominican  house  at  Oxford.  The  King 
declared  therein  that  these  foreigners  were  a  source  of  very 
much  trouble  and  disturbance,  since  they  refused  to  abide  by 
the  customs  of  the  house  and  province,  and  claimed  all  sorts 
of  special  dispensations.  In  virtue  of  his  royal  authority, 
Edward  III  forbade  Stephen  Coulyng  or  any  other  Preaching 
Friar  sent  as  visitator  by  the  Master-General  to  make  changes 
in  the  discipline  of  the  Province,  or  to  punish  the  English 
friars  who  were  unjustly  supposed  to  have  intrigued  at  Court 

'    Little,  Greyfriars  of  Oxford,  p.  86. 

-  Wills,    P.C.C.,    2    Marche;    Nicholas,    Vetusta    Testamcnta,   vol.    i, 

P-  'S9- 

8  P.R.O.  R.  P.,  44  Edw.  Ill,  p.  1,  m.  14  dorso. 

4  P.R.O.  R.  C,  47  Edw.  Ill,  m.  10;  Rymer,  vol.  iii,  p.  991. 

1  Ibid.,  48  Edw.  Ill,  m.  13. 


Observance  143 

to  secure  the  expulsion  of  the  foreigners.  Contraveners  of 
this  decree  would  be  treated  as  rebels.  In  13781  the  affair 
was  further  complicated  by  another  squabble  between  England 
and  Rome  over  the  administration  of  the  Irish  priories.  Al- 
ready at  the  beginning  of  the  fourteenth  century  the  Irish 
house  refused  to  pay  any  attention  to  the  Vicar  set  over  them 
by  the  English  Provincial  (for  Ireland  remained  a  portion  of 
the  English  Province  till  the  eve  of  the  Reformation:  only  in 
1484 2  did  it  secure  its  Home  Rule).  One,  whom  the  General 
Chapter  of  Lyons  in  1318'  judged  to  be  the  ringleader  (his 
name  is  spelt  in  four  different  ways  as  Henry  Glam  or  Sliap, 
or  Placi,  or  Plaep,  so  that  it  is  difficult  to  guess  what  the 
original  really  was)  was  solemnly  drummed  out  of  the  English 
Province — a  proceeding  he  probably  hugely  enjoyed.  But  the 
dispute  of  1378  concerned  certain  ordinations  and  regulations 
made  for  Ireland  by  the  Provincial,  Thomas  Rushook,  and  his 
Irish  Vicar,  John  Leicester.  John  Paris  was  appointed  by  the 
Master-General  as  Vicar  in  Ireland  in  Leicester's  place,  and 
Rushook  was  taken  off  from  his  provincialate.  An  appeal 
was  made  to  the  Holy  See,  a  commission  appointed  under 
the  presidency  of  Cardinal  Nicholas  Caraccioli,  O.P.,  and  the 
matter  thoroughly  sifted.  Pope  Boniface  IX  in  1397  finally 
decided,  on  the  finding  of  the  commission,  in  favour  ot 
Rushook,  who  was  declared  Provincial,  his  decrees  upheld, 
and  all  subsequent  appointments  in  Ireland  quashed.4  But 
just  at  this  date  (1378)  the  Provincial  Chapter  petitioned 
King  and  Parliament  to  hear  their  proctors  against  John 
Paris,  who  was  accused  by  them  of  acting  against  the 
honour  of  the  kingdom  and  the  safety  of  the  Order.5  For 
six  years  after  this  there  seems  to  have  been  peace,  or  at 
least  silence.  Then  in  1384  there  were  signs  that  the 
struggle  was  beginning  again.6  The  King  addressed  a  letter 
to  the  Provincial  and  Definitors  assembled  in  Chapter,  not  to 
allow  any  letters  (except  such  as  came  from  the  Pope)  to  be 
obtained  from  abroad,  withdrawing  any  friar  from  obedience 
to  the  Order.  Meanwhile  the  new  Master-General,  with  his 
ideas  of  reform,  had  taken  office.  We  should  expect  to  find 
him  on  the  side  of  law  and  order,  aiding  the  English  friars  in 
their  attempts  to  keep  up  the  true  law  of  the  Constitutions. 
But,  unfortunately,  the  Master-General  was  at  a  distance,  so 
that  a  correct  version  of  what  was  happening  could  not  easily 
reach  him.  There  were  others  nearer,  who  made  their  voices 
prevail.  The  foreign  friars  were  to  return.  Their  dispensa- 
tions were  to  be  accepted  by  the  English.   The  King  retorted 

1  Bull.,  vol.  ii,  p.  69.  2  Hibernia  Dominicana,  p.  817. 

3  Acta  Cap.  Gen.,  vol.  ii,  p.  112. 

4  Hibernia  Dominicana,  p.  817. 

*  P. R.O.  Petitiones  ad  Parliamentum,  No.  290  R. 
s  P.R.O.  R.  C,  7  Rich.  II,  m.  8. 


144  XTbe  Bnglisb  Dominicans 

by  an  ordinance  which  attacked  the  right  of  the  General  to 
divide  up  the  Province  into  houses  of  observance,  as  had  been 
done  abroad.  This  was  declared  a  new  and  pernicious  way 
of  defeating-  reform.  Unless  it  was  backed  up  by  a  papal 
bull,  or  unless  it  was  approved  by  the  majority  of"  the 
Masters  of  Theology  of  the  Province,  the  friars  were  to  pay 
no  attention  to  it.  To  read  this  document  was  to  see  in  it  a 
declaration  of  war  against  the  General.  But  it  is  to  be  noted 
that  both  parties  were  anxious  for  the  better  state  of  the 
Province.  The  objective  was  the  same  in  both  cases,  only  the 
strategy  and  the  tactics  were  at  variance. 

The  registers  of  the  Master-General  from  13901  onwards 
are  full  of  dispensations  and  favours.  Leave  is  given  to  this 
friar  to  visit  the  Holy  Land,  another  is  restored  to  rights  and 
privileges,  another  may  visit  his  friends  four  times  a  year 
with  any  one  else  he  likes,  another  is  graciously  heard  and  his 
petition  granted  of  choosing  his  place  in  choir  and  refectory. 
At  the  same  time  (it  was  this  that  Richard  II  stigmatized  as 
an  attempt  to  split  the  Province)  William  of  Barleton2  was 
made  Prior  of  Newcastle-under-Lyme,  where  he  could  gather 
together  all  those  who  wished  to  follow  the  strict  observance. 
Yet  on  the  very  day  of  this  division  of  house  against  house  all 
over  the  Province  (for  Cork  was  to  be  in  Ireland  what  New- 
castle was  in  England)  B.  Raymund  of  Capua  gaily  restored 
Nicholas  Chestreton' to  favour  which  he  had  lost  by  apostasy, 
and  Richard  Bourne1  was  assigned  to  Canterbury  and 
exempted  from  common  services.  The  protests  of  the 
English  Provincial  against  all  this  were  in  the  very  name  of 
observance.  Whereas  no  doubt  Raymund,  acting  on  Con- 
tinental experience,  believed  the  Province  to  be  in  a  state  of 
decline,  and  thought  by  dispensing  the  most  hopeless  and 
separating  the  most  zealous  to  bring  back  forgotten  fervour, 
the  real  facts  of  the  case  were  the  exact  opposite,  for  the  Pro- 
vince had  been  ruled  by  a  succession  of  very  strong  men, 
whose  regime  was  if  anything  too  severe,  and  who  loathed 
exemptions  and  dispensations  as  tending  to  break  up  that 
unity  of  discipline  and  life  which  foreign  ways  and  foreign 
distinctions  had  alone  been  able  to  trouble. 

The  rumours  of  this  in  13925  reached  the  ears  of  Pope 
Boniface  IX,  who  commanded  the  English  Dominicans  to 
behave  to  the  Master-General  with  the  same  submission  as 
the  friars  of  other  nations  behaved;  and  Raymund  sailed 
along,  obstinately  following  his  own  ideas.  In  13936  he 
removed  the  Provincial,  Friar  Seward,  appointed  as  his  vicar 
Robert  Humbleton,  with  Thomas  Palmer  as  head  of  the 
Visitation  of  London  and  the  Marches,  and  William  Bagthorpe 

1  Registrum  B.  Raymundi,  Add.  MSS.,  6716. 

-  Ibid.  3  Ibid.  *  Ibid. 

s  Madox,  Formulare,  p.  425.  s  Mortier,  vol.  iii,  p.  659. 


w 

D 

in 

_J 

W 

Oh 

/ 

o 

'J 

£ 

o 

t/3 

C/3 

w 

hJ 

a 

J 

-j 

^" 

i/i 

I-1 

r/i 

^ 

y. 

O 

^ 

DC 

ffi 

U 

?; 

a 

K 

PL, 

< 

O 

DC 

Q 

LTo  face  p.  144 


©bservance  145 

as  head  of  the  Visitation  of  Cambridge  and  York.  On 
22  November  of  the  same  year  Palmer  was  elected  Provincial 
at  the  English  Chapter  and  confirmed  in  office  by  the  Master- 
General.1  But  the  tumult  grew  the  more  fiercely,  while  disci- 
pline, the  cause  of  the  whole  dispute,  must  have  suffered  from 
the  strained  purpose  of  the  opposed  authorities.  On  15  October 
of  the  same  year  Pope  Boniface  IX  addressed  a  bull  to  the 
Master-General,  detailing  the  complaints  of  King  Richard  II 
and  others,  especially  that  certain  Dominicans  nominated  as 
papal  chaplains  had  abused  their  powers  and  privileges  by 
refusing  to  come  to  choir  for  Divine  Office.2  On  this  account 
the  Pope  forbids  any  of  his  chaplains  to  be  absent  from  choir 
either  by  day  or  night,  with  the  sole  exception  of  Nicholas 
Summerton,  who  had  laboured,  and  was  still  labouring,  in 
the  interests  of  the  Holy  Roman  Church.  Despite  this,  on 
24  November  1395  Raymund  issued  a  new  list  of  exemptions 
and  dispensations,  of  which  one  alone  will  suffice:  William 
Howard  is  assigned  to  Thetford  Priory,  with  permission  to 
stay  away  from  refectory  or  choir,  to  have  free  access  to  the 
pantry  whenever  it  pleased  him,  to  choose  a  companion  with 
whom  to  have  his  meals,  and  to  retain  any  of  his  personal 
effects,  whether  with  or  without  leave  of  his  prior  or  pro- 
vincial.3 Almost  at  the  same  time  Raymund  issued  a  letter 
demanding  a  thorough  investigation  into  the  conduct  of 
Thomas  Palmer,  the  Provincial,  whom  he  accuses  of  excessive 
harshness,  and  of  John  Pyng,  Prior  of  London.4  The  charges 
made  concerning  Palmer  are  nine  in  all : 

(1)  Whether  Robert  Humbleton  was  Vicar  of  the  Chapter 
when  Palmer  was  elected  Provincial,  and  whether  he 
scrutinized  the  votes  with  due  care. 

(2)  Whether  Robert  Humbleton  had  ever  been  excommuni- 
cated by  the  Holy  See. 

(3)  Whether,  if  he  had  been  so  excommunicated,  before 
presiding  over  the  election  he  had  been  absolved  from 
censures. 

(4)  Whether  Thomas  Palmer  had  ever  been  disobedient 
and  irreverent,  especially  to  letters  received  from  his 
superiors. 

(5)  Whether  Thomas  Palmer  had  made  use  of  especially 
severe  punishment,  beyond  all  custom. 

(6)  Whether  Thomas  Palmer  had  given  bread  and  water  in 
the  prison,  known  in  the  English  Province  as  Sequestra, 
to  any  unconvicted  person  in  order  to  make  him  confess. 

(7)  Whether  Thomas  Palmer  had  broken  publicly  the  laws, 
customs,  and  constitutions. 

1  Mortier,  vol.  iii,  p.  659.  2  Bull.,  vol.  ii,  p.  337. 

3  Registrum  B.  Raymundi,  Add.  MSS.,  6716. 

4  Mortier,  vol.  iii,  pp.  660-661. 

L 


h6  TIbe  Bnglisb  Dominicans 

(8)  Whether,  owing  to  his  severity,  some  friars  had  left  the 
Order  or  apostatised  or  even  committed  suicide. 

(9)  Whether  Thomas  Palmer  had  harried  the  foreign  students 

at  Oxford  or  taken  away  from  them  the  privileges 
bestowed  by  his  predecessors  or  by  Raymund  or  the 
last  General  Chapter  held  at  Venice. 

Against  the  Prior  of  London  it  was  alleged  that  he  had 
denounced  certain  bulls,  that  he  had  a  personal  deposit  of 
money,  that  he  kept  no  duplicate  inventory  of  the  goods  of 
the  priory,  that  he  refused  to  accept  friars  assigned  to  his 
house  by  the  Master-General.  All  ex-priors,  Lectors,  and 
Readers  of  Sentences  were  to  investigate  the  accounts,  and 
if  six  of  the  worthier  members  of  the  community  agreed  as  to 
the  truth  of  the  charges,  John  Pyng  was  to  be  removed  from 
office.  As  John  was  still  Prior  in  1396  it  is  presumed  that 
the  charges  were  held  not  to  be  substantiated. 

Unfortunately,  the  method  of  procedure  adopted  against 
the  Provincial  was  hardly  consonant  with  fairness,  for  the 
Master-General  appointed  as  judge,  Friar  William  Bagthorpe, 
who,  if  six  out  of  the  nine  articles  preferred  were  in  his  judge- 
ment proved,  was  to  absolve  Palmer  from  office  and  himself 
to  succeed  at  once  as  Vicar-General  of  the  English  friars. 
No  doubt  William  Bagthorpe  was  a  most  excellent  person 
(though  when  the  time  of  election  eventually  came  his 
brethren  did  not  confirm  him  in  office,  but  chose  another 
friar,  William  Peckworth,  as  Provincial),  but  it  was  putting 
him  in  a  wholly  false  position  to  make  him  judge  of  Thomas 
Palmer,  with  the  right  of  succession  if  he  found  Palmer  guilty. 
Palmer  was  found  guilty,  and,  ipso  facto,  Bagthorpe  became 
Vicar-General. 

Richard  II  continued  quietly  to  back  up  the  English  ideals 
by  issuing  a  royal  mandate  on  12  July  13961  to  the  Prior  of 
Oxford,  bidding  him  send  away  from  the  house  all  those 
students  who  claimed  to  have  received  certain  liberties  and 
privileges  from  B.  Raymund,  and  who  refused  to  accept  or 
follow  regular  obedience  and  the  customs  of  the  house,  to  wit, 
onera  chori  et  donius.  This  was  signed  at  Woodstock  (within 
a  dozen  miles  of  Oxford)  by  "the  King  himself."  It  is 
repeated  almost  verbally  by  Henry  IV,  1  May  1402, 2  who 
adds  that  for  the  friars  to  act  otherwise  would  be  contrary  to 
the  wish  of  the  benefactors  of  the  house.  Almost  in  the  same 
month  comes  a  letter  from  the  General  complaining  bitterly 
of  the  accusations  made  against  him  by  the  Province  and  by 
Richard  II,  whom  of  all  Christian  princes  he  most  loves.  He 
denies  that  he  has  ever  been  anti-English,  or  that  he  was  in  any 
sense  hostile  to  the  solemnity  of  Divine  worship.    Pathetic  in 

1  P.R.O.  R.  C,  20  Rich   II,  p.  1,  m.  32. 
u  Ibid.,  3  Hen.  IV,  p.  2,  m.  18. 


©bsenmnce  147 

its  meek  tone,  the  letter  of  B.  Raymund  is  a  confirmation  of 
the  contention  that  the  English  Province  upheld  the  best  tra- 
ditions of  Dominican  life.  In  it  the  Master-General  gives  up 
all  his  opposition,  and  assures  the  Province  that  he  had  not 
intended  to  do  anything-  contrary  to  religious  discipline.  If 
any  person  of  evil  life  claimed  authority  for  his  actions  by 
asserting  a  dispensation  from  Rome,  the  Saint  bade  them 
hold  all  such  leave  to  have  been  surreptitiously  obtained. 
Oddly  enough,  the  dispensations  still  continued  to  flow  from 
Rome,  and  were  duly  noted  in  the  register  of  the  General. 
The  new  King  (Henry  IV)  was  as  fierce  and  determined  as  his 
predecessor,  forbidding  on  21  October  14031  any  decrees  or 
graces  granted  from  abroad  to  be  used  in  England  without 
local  authority,  and  refusing  on  5  April  1405"  to  allow  the 
taxes  levied  by  the  General  to  be  paid  or  sent  out  of  the 
kingdom,  as  the  demand  for  money  was  made  "  not  out  of 
religious  zeal  but  by  greed."  Finally  Pope  Martin  V  on 
21  April  1428  issued  a  bull  to  the  Province  expressing  his 
delight  with  the  English  friars,  whom  he  characterized  as 
"good  religious,  truly  devoted  to  the  Holy  See."3 

Thus  the  long  quarrel  died  fitfully  away.  Yet  it  is  abun- 
dantly clear  that  there  was  little  sign  of  laxity  among  the 
responsible  authorities  of  the  Province.  Their  whole  attitude 
was  one  of  protest  against  the  endless  stream  of  dispensations 
emanating  from  Rome,  petty,  no  doubt,  in  detail,  and  finding 
easy  acceptance  here  and  there,  yet  repugnant  to  the  majority, 
to  those  elected  by  their  brethren  to  posts  of  importance  in 
England.  The  King  backed  up  the  insistence  made  by  prior 
and  provincial  on  the  constitutional  round  of  the  day,  with  its 
incidents  of  common  table,  choral  recitation  of  office,  and  the 
customary  obedience  of  the  house,  though  he  is  careful  to 
defend  these  superiors  from  any  charge  of  intriguing  with  him 
to  over-set  the  commands  of  the  Master-General.  Richard  II, 
out  of  real  devotion,  and  Henry  IV,  out  of  policy,  favoured 
the  side  of  religious  discipline. 

A  last  point  may  be  quoted  which  is  relied  on  by  continental 
historians  as  a  sign  of  the  slackened  interest  in  observance 
shown  by  English  Dominicans.4  The  General  Chapter  of  1442, 
held  at  Avignon,  declared  that  "because  the  English  Province 
has  omitted  to  send  representatives  to  the  General  Chapter 
now  for  many  years  .  .  .  we  wish  that  through  the  Master- 
General  or  through  his  Vicar  appointed  to  make  a  visitation 
of  the  Province  those  who  by  their  negligence  or  malice  are 
guilty  of  this  should  be  punished,  and  that  the  Acts  of  the 
present  Chapter  (notwithstanding  this  absence)  should  be 
.accepted    and  observed."    Now  "many   years"  has  a  very 

1  P.R.O.  R.C.,s  Hen.  IV,  p.  1,  m.  27. 

2  Ibid.,  6  Hen.  IV,  m.  14.  3  Bull.,  vol.  ii,  p.  686. 
4  Acta  Cap.  Gen.,  vol.  iii,  p.  250. 


H8  'Gbe  Englisb  Dominicans 

ominous  sound,  and  suggests  considerable  neglect  of  this 
duty  of  reunion.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  it  cannot  mean  more 
than  eight  years  at  most  since  Gilbert  Brown,  Master  in 
Theology,  was  certainly  present  at  the  General  Chapter  held 
at  Colmar  in  1434, 1  and  he  represented  England.  During, 
therefore,  the  period  which  covered  the  loss  of  England's 
French  dominions  and  the  triumphs  of  Joan  of  Arc  (from 
1434  to  1442)  the  complaint  is  made  that  from  these  islands 
no  one  attended  these  General  Chapters.  Yet  during  that 
very  period,  when  the  state  of  the  country  was  politically  and. 
socially  disturbed,  and  when  every  excuse  could  be  made  for 
the  Province,  it  is  to  be  noted  that  only  two  such  Chapters 
were  held,  one  at  Venice  (1437)  and  one  at  Savigliano  (1439), 
and  these  were  farther  off  from  England  than  from  anywhere 
else.  Between  1442  and  1518  only  fifteen  Chapters  (out  of 
the  twenty-eight  held)  give  the  names  of  those  present,  and 
at  twelve  of  these  sat  representatives  of  the  English  friars.2 
Three,  that  is  to  say,  were  missed  over  a  period  of  seventy-six 
years.  The  Province  of  Lombardy  during  that  period  was 
unrepresented  at  eight,  the  Provinces  of  Spain  and  Toulouse 
at  three,  of  France  and  Rome  at  two,  which  shows  the  list  of 
English  failures  to  attend  as  not  at  all  a  damaging  record. 

There  were  four  more  Chapters  held  before  ruin  and  penal 
exactions  made  normal  religious  life  impossible  in  these 
islands.  From  the  Chapter  of  Valladolid  in  1523  the  Pro- 
vincials of  France  and  England  were  both  excused  "on 
account  of  the  difficulties  arising  from  war  and  pestilence."  : 
In  1525,  when  the  friars  were  to  meet  in  Rome,  there  were 
obvious  reasons  why  no  subjects  of  Henry  VIII  would  have 
been  allowed  by  their  royal  master  to  enter  the  city  of  the 
Popes.  In  1530  dealings  with  Rome  were  forbidden  formally 
by  law;  and  by  1532  the  King  had  declared  himself  supreme 
head  of  the  Church  in  England,  and  watched  with  jealous 
eye  every  coming  and  going  over-seas.  Hence  if  we  take  one 
symptom  after  another  which  is  supposed  to  show  how  far 
the  Province  had  declined  from  its  primitive  fervour  we  dis- 
cover that  one  after  another  they  point  to  the  same  idea,  viz., 
that  on  the  whole,  from  its  beginnings  to  close  on  its  ruin 
under  Henry  VIII,  it  strove  repeatedly  under  its  superiors  to 
live  up  to  its  ideals.  Even  after  the  Black  Death  had  spent 
its  fury,  and  been  succeeded  by  a  relaxation  of  the  severe  and 
careful  choosing  of  novices,  those  who  had  been  brought  up 
under  or  had  been  the  immediate  heirs  to  the  older  system 
carried  with  them  the  rugged  decorum  of  full  activity.  As 
confessors,  as  theologians  and  preachers,  as  bishops,  they 
held  up  to  the  traditions  to  which  they  had  succeeded. 

1  Ada  Cap.  Gen.,  vol.  iii,  p.  226. 

2  Ibid.,  pp.  268,  280,  301,  334,  354,  374,  393  ;  vol.  iv,  pp.  2,  25,  62,  124* 
156.  3  Ibid.,  vol.  iv,  p.  193. 


©bservance  149 

No  doubt  out  of  the  four  Orders  of  friars,  quite  a  number, 
as  has  been  repeatedly  admitted,  broke  loose  and  carried  their 
religious  habits  into  places  and  circumstances  where  scandal 
was  caused,  and  the  Faith  itself  led  into  disrepute.  There  is 
evidence  of  this  perhaps  in  the  many  records  of  the  pursuit 
and  capture  of  apostates.  But  it  is  no  use  to  take  the  verses 
of  Chaucer,  or  the  sermons  of  Wycliffe,  or  the  sneers  of 
Matthew  Paris,  or  the  cynicism  of  Fitz-Ralph  as  real  sober 
history.  They  exhibit  one  side  of  Dominican  life ;  but  not  the 
only  side,  nor  certainly  the  most  normal :  it  would  be  as  vain 
to  accuse  lords  of  drunkenness,  and  troopers  of  swearing,  on 
the  mere  strength  of  a  proverbial  expression.  Unpopular  as 
the  friars  may  very  often  have  been  it  is  curious  that  in 
Wycliffe's  eyes  they  were  the  leaders  and  instigators  of  the 
Peasant  Revolt  of  1381.  The  four  Orders  of  friars  issued  an 
indignant  protest  against  the  accusation,  but  many  others 
besides  Wycliffe  were  convinced  of  their  participation  in  the 
affair.  The  unnamed  chronicler  of  S.  Albans  who  wrote  the 
Chronicon  Angliae  considers  their  influence  over  the  people 
to  have  been  so  great  that  had  they  chosen  they  could  easily 
have  prevented  the  outbreak.  It  is  true  that  he  traces  this 
influence  to  their  gross  flattery  of  rich  and  poor;  but  this  at 
any  rate  refutes  the  idea  of  their  general  want  of  popularity. 
Langland,  in  the  Vision  of  Piers  Plowman,  also  accuses  them 
explicitly  of  endeavouring  to  teach  religious  communism  as  a 
political  obligation : 

Envy  heard  this  and  bade  friars  go  to  school, 

And  learn  logic  and  law  and  eke  contemplation, 

And  preach  men  of  Plato  and  prove  it  by  Seneca 

That  all  things  under  heaven  ought  to  be  in  common.  .   .  . 

The  same  opinion  is  reflected  in  the  fabricated  confession 
of  Jack  Straw,  for  he  is  made  to  declare  that  the  rebels  in- 
tended, if  the  revolution  had  been  successful,  to  suppress  all 
the  secular  clergy  and  monastic  orders,  as  the  friars  by  them- 
selves were  sufficiently  numerous  to  supply  the  spiritual 
needs  of  the  whole  kingdom.  Actually,  too,  among  the  rebels, 
friars  are  stated  by  contemporaries  to  have  marched  up  from 
Kent.1 

Now,  however  this  evidence  may  be  questioned,  it  can  be 
interpreted  at  least  in  this  sense,  that  at  the  time  among  the 
poorer  classes  the  friars  were  popular.  Moreover,  we  have 
ample  proof  that  at  the  Court,  and  to  the  personal  pleasure  of 
the  King,  they  were  also  held  in  much  friendship.  At  either 
end  of  the  social  scale  they  found  themselves  reverenced  and 
followed.  It  can  therefore  only  appear  as  though  whatever 
difficulties  they  experienced  were  due  to  the  middle  classes. 
Yet  it  is  more  than  clear  from  the  long  list  of  wills  that  among 
these  too,  at  least  among  the  merchant  class,  were  to  be 
1  Mediaeval  Socialism,  pp.  39-40. 


150  Ube  English  Dominicans 

found  the  greatest  benefactors  whom  the  friars  had.  To  judge 
therefore  by  actual  evidence,  such  as  can  after  this  long  lapse 
of  years  be  carefully  collected,  it  would  seem  as  though  de- 
spite many  who  fell  short  of  the  ideals  of  the  Order,  the 
Dominicans  on  the  whole  secured  no  small  share  in  the 
popular  regard  in  which  by  all  classes  the  friars  were  held. 
The  greater  and  lesser  baronage  were  perhaps  least  devoted 
to  religion,  and  they  do  seem  (with  one  or  two  exceptions)  to 
have  held  aloof  from  the  Preaching  Friars.  Yet  even  these 
found  occasion  to  make  use  of  the  good  offices  of  the  children 
of  S.  Dominic.  In  Capgrave's  Chronicle  we  find  this  para- 
graph describing  the  last  hours  of  Henry  IV:  "In  the  four- 
teenth year,  this  King  died,  the  20th  day  of  March  when  he 
had  reigned  thirteen  years  and  a  half.  At  his  death,  as  was 
reported  of  full  sad  men,  certain  lords  steered  his  confessor, 
Father  John  Till,  Doctor  of  Divinity,1  that  he  should  induce 
the  King  to  repent  him  and  do  penance  in  special  for  three 
things — one  for  the  death  of  King  Richard;  the  other  for  the 
death  of  Archbishop  Scrope;  the  third  for  the  wrong  title  of 
the  Crown.  And  his  answer  was  this :  For  the  first  two 
points  I  wrote  unto  the  Pope  the  very  truth  of  my  conscience 
and  he  sent  me  a  bull  with  absolution  and  penance  assigned 
which  I  have  fulfilled.  And  as  for  the  third  point  it  is  hard  to 
set  a  remedy,  for  my  children  will  not  suffer  that  the  regalia 
go  out  of  our  lineage."2 

How  far  can  this  popularity  be  set  to  the  proof  of  observ- 
ance? Perhaps  hardly  at  all,  since  the  two  things  have  no 
immediate  connection.  Yet  there  is  this  to  be  noticed,  that 
influence  implies  respect  (unless  it  be  merely  tyrannous  and 
inquisitorial,  which  cannot  be  charged  in  any  sense  whatever 
against  the  English  Dominicans),  and  respect  itself  in  a 
Catholic  community  implies  in  turn  that  the  objects  of  it 
have  in  no  sense  whatever  outraged  public  opinion  by  scandal 
or  lawless  living.  Now  abroad  it  was  not  only  a  lack  of  observ- 
ance that  moved  S.  Catherine  of  Siena  and  S.  Vincent  Ferrer 
to  deplore  the  decline  of  the  Preaching  Friars,  but  a  corres- 
ponding lack  of  influence  which  they  equally  lament.  The 
fact,  therefore,  that  judging  by  actual  documentary  evidence 
we  are  sure  of  the  persistence,  and  even  extension  of  the  in- 
fluence of  the  friars  in  English  life  makes  us  incline  to  the 
general  proposition  that  up  to  the  end  of  the  reign  of  Henry  IV 
little  decline  can  be  noticed  in  the  steadfastness  with  which 
the  Preaching  Friars  endeavoured  to  achieve  some  definite 
approach  to  the  ideals  of  S.  Dominic. 

1  Why  does  Mr.  Belloc  in  "  Eye-Witnesses"  speak  of  him  as  Parson 
Till? 

2  Capgrave,  Chronicle  of  England,  p.  302. 


CHAPTER  VIII 
THE  REFORMATION 

DESPITE  every  endeavour  made  by  the  English 
Province  it  seems  almost  certain  that  gradually 
the  various  priories  began  to  decline  in  numbers 
and  in  fervour.  It  would  almost  seem  as  though 
the  stimulus  of  discussion  or  quarrel  was  required 
to  keep  vigorous  the  Preaching  Friars.  Soon  after  their 
entrance  into  these  islands,  indeed,  soon  after  their  very 
foundation,  they  went  through  a  period  of  persecution  or 
attack  from  already  established  interests  and  monastic  bodies, 
resenting  the  encroachment  of  a  merely  recent  establishment. 
Hardly  had  they  settled  down  themselves  as  a  regular  feature 
of  English  life  than  they  encountered  a  philosophical  antagon- 
ism that  threatened  to  overwhelm  entirely  the  progress  they 
had  made.  Straight  on  this  followed  their  controversy  with 
the  University  authorities  of  Oxford  and  Cambridge  which 
occupied  a  large  place  in  the  energies  of  the  Province.  Then 
followed  the  successful  litigation  with  two  successive  Master- 
Generals,  which  proved,  as  well  as  produced,  the  religious 
fervour  of  the  friars.  For  a  while  came  further  excitement  in 
the  doctrinal  tempest  evoked  by  the  teaching  of  Wycliffe.  But 
statutes  and  civil  authority  broke  such  force  as  Lollardism 
had  begun  to  acquire,  and  drove  it  off  sullenly  and  silently  to 
the  fringe  of  the  east  coast  and  the  beech  woods  of  the 
Chilterns,  where  continental,  especially  German,  influence 
alone  kept  it  alive  as  a  disruptive  power.  Intellectually 
Wycliffism  had  suffered  eclipse.  Thereby  it  ceased  to  interest 
the  friars.  They  had  as  a  result  no  real  educated  power  to 
attack  them  on  intellectual  grounds.  Silent,  dulled,  asleep, 
they  took,  in  the  last  century  of  their  pre-Reformation  exist- 
ence, hardly  any  place  at  all  in  the  national  life. 

The  petition  of  the  Guildford  friars  to  Henry  VIII  is  evid- 
ence of  the  state  of  many  other  priories  in  England.  It  is 
dated  October  1537. 

"  In  most  humble  wise  sheweth  unto  your  most  excellent 
highness  and  prudent  wisdom  your  faithfully  loving  orators 
and  continual  beadsmen  the  prior  and  convent  of  the  Friar 
Preachers  within  your  Town  of  Guildford,  the  which  said  poor 
place  being  now  of  your  most  gracious  Queen  Jane's  founda- 
tion, and  so  ever  hitherto  hath  continued  from  the  third  and 
]  year  of  Queen  Eleanor,  wife  and  spouse  unto  King 
Henry  III,  for  whom  as  first  foundress  we  are  continually 
bound  to  pray,  for  the  soul  and  now  also  for  the  most  high 
puissant  and  excellent  estate  of  our  said  most  gracious  Queen 
to  this  foundation  by  very  right,  title  of  succession  foundress, 
lamentably  beseech  your  noble  grace,  of  your  bountiful  good- 
ness, pretending  there  your  charity   toward    us,   your    said 

151 


i52  Ube  Bnglisb  Dominicans 

beadsmen.  Also  for  the  great  zeal,  amity,  love  and  favour 
that  your  noble  grace  and  high  majesty  doth  pretend  towards 
this  our  said  place  of  your  said  gracious  Queen's  foundation, 
in  that  it  hath  pleased  your  highness  to  edify,  build,  set  up  a 
place  of  honour  upon  and  within  the  precincts  of  the  said 
foundation  for  the  high  pleasure  of  your  noble  grace,  your 
heirs  and  successors  for  evermore ;  which  place  decayeth  and 
for  fear  it  should  decay  more  and  more,  your  said  orators 
having  no  land's  rent  nor  other  tenements  for  the  maintenance 
of  the  said  house  and  convent,  but  liveth  by  charity  and  alms 
of  all  true  Christian  people— the  which  charity  and  alms  we 
receive  not  so  plentiful  as  we  have  in  times  past,  wherethrough 
the  said  place  hath  sustained  great  scarcity  and  penury,  as 
well  oftentimes  wanting  to  their  bodily  sustentation  as  in 
maintenance  of  their  ruinous  house  and  building.  Also  want- 
ing wherewith  to  accomplish  manifold  pleasures  for  your  grace 
to  be  done,  as  in  setting  out  trying  and  fashioning  grounds 
and  gardens  about  your  said  place,  wherefore,  and  if  it  may 
stand  with  your  gracious  pleasure  to  annex,  grant,  give 
annuite,  benefice,  prebendy,  free  chapel,  corody,  commanding 
or  order  andgoverny  over  any  house  of  alms  and  prayers  unto 
the  said  prior  and  convent  as  well,  and  first  for  the  mainten- 
ance of  your  said  place  and  thereto  bind  us  perpetually,  as 
also  to  succour,  aid,  and  comfort  of  your  said  orators  and 
beadsmen,  and  maintaining  their  ruinous  building,  also  renew- 
ing and  keeping  such  ground  and  gardens  encompassing  your 
said  place,  trusting  always  to  your  Grace's  pleasure,  of  the 
yearly  value  as  your  Highness,  with  your  honourable  Council, 
can  discern,  or  as  it  please  your  noble  Grace  to  show  your 
most  high  favour  thereto  the  premises,  tenderly  considering 
the  same.  In  so  doing,  your  said  orators  daily  prayeth  to 
Almighty  God  for  your  most  princely  and  honourable  estate 
to  reign,  prosper,  and  endure.     Amen."1 

This  enormous  sentence  (besides  showing  us  Jane  Seymour 
as  a  foundress  of  a  religious  house,  Henry  as  considered 
favourable  to  the  friars  as  late  as  1537,  and  the  sort  of  argu- 
ments likely  to  appeal  to  the  King)  is  sufficiently  illuminative 
of  the  depths  to  which  the  English  Dominicans  had  sunk. 
Alms  were  lacking;  so  they  cringe  to  the  King.  There  is 
nothing  to  show  that  Henry  was  moved  to  give  them  any- 
thing, though  in  1531  he  had  once  bestowed  ^5  "  to  the 
friers  of  Guildeford  in  reward."2  Princess  Mary  was  kinder: 
"  Item  given  to  the  Freres  at  guldford  vjs.  viij"  figures  in  her 
accounts  for  that  year.3  Materially  depleted  by  the  want  of 
alms  the  English  priories  had  also  shrunk  considerably  in  the 
numbers   of  their  community,  dwindling  even  in  the   great 

1  Reliquary,  1887,  p.  16.  2  Ibid.,  pp.  11  and  16. 

3  Ibid.,  p.  11. 


XTbe  Reformation  153 

houses  of  London  and  Gloucester  to  a  very  much  reduced  list 
of  friars. 

Then  after  this  long  peace  came  once  more  the  sound  of 
religious  discussion,  and  as  a  result  the  friars  began  to  stir 
themselves  and  to  awake  from  lethargy.  Had  the  process 
been  allowed  to  develop  normally  it  would  seem  certain  that 
the  lost  position  would  have  been  reoccupied,  but  royal 
authority,  moved  by  royal  conscience  and  royal  greed, 
decided  to  interfere.  The  friaries  were  harassed,  eventually 
dissolved ;  thus  before  there  was  time  to  organize  the  grow- 
ing signs  of  life,  the  whole  Province  was  suppressed  by  perse- 
cution, and  during  nearly  fifty  years  had  no  official  existence, 
though,  of  course,  the  remnants  of  the  English  Province  sur- 
vived as  scattered  units  till  they  were  gathered  together  again 
under  a  Vicar-Provincial  in  1622. 

The  first  symptom  of  the  impending  religious  struggle,  as 
far  as  the  Dominicans  were  concerned,  occurs  in  a  letter  of 
John  Hilsey,  the  Prior  of  Bristol,  dated  2  May  1532,  referring 
to  the  sermons  of  Latimer  in  that  city.  It  was  addressed  to 
the  Lord  Chancellor: 

"Master  Chancellor. 

"  I  commend  me  unto  you  as  heartily  as  I  may  think, 
trusting  in  God  that  you  be  (the  which  Jesu  continue)  in  good 
prosperity.  It  is  not  out  of  your  Mastership's  remembrance 
that  in  the  Lent  I  did  write  unto  you  of  the  great  division 
that  was  (yea,  and  that  is)  among  the  people  in  the  town  of 
Bristol  of  the  which  I  wrote  unto  you  that  it  came  by  the 
preaching  of  one  Master  Latimer,  a  man  not  unknown.  I 
wrote  to  you  also  that  he  spoke  of  pilgrimages,  worshipping 
of  saints,  worshipping  of  images,  of  purgatory,  etc.,  the 
which  he  did  vehemently  pursuade  towards  the  contrary  that 
the  people  were  not  a  little  offended.  I  wrote  also  that  some 
men  thought  necessary  to  preach  against  him  the  which  I 
supposed  not  best  except  he  should  be  put  to  silence  for  fear 
of  further  division,  the  which  by  this  course  is  now  happened 
indeed.  This  was  the  occasion  of  my  first  letter,  first  the 
fame  that  I  heard  of  this  man,  Master  Latimer,  before  that  I 
knew  him,  the  which  fame  deceived  not  only  me  but  others  as 
well  learned  as  I ;  second  was  the  vehement  persuading 
against  the  abuse  of  these  things  as  is  above  written,  as  of 
masses,  of  scala  coeli  pardons,  the  fire  of  hell,  the  state  of  the 
souls  in  purgatory,  of  faith  without  good  works,  of  Our  Lady 
to  be  a  sinner  or  no  sinner,  etc.,  the  which  I  and  such  others 
did  suppose  that  he  did  preach  to  the  intent  to  confound  these 
things;  whereupon  both  the  worshipful  men,  Master  Doctor 
Powell,  Master  Goodrich,  Master  Heberdyne,  Master  Prior  of 
S.  James  and  I  did  preach  against,  approving  purgatory,  pil- 
grimages, the  worshipping  of  saints  and  images,  also  approv- 


i54  Zhe  Enolisb  Dominicans 

ing  that  faith  without  works  is  but  dead,  and  that  Our  Lady, 
being  full  of  grace,  is  and  was  without  the  spot  of  sin,  but 
when  we  had  done  I  reckoned  we  laboured  but  in  vain.  .  .  . 
For  since  I  have  commenced  with  Master  Latimer,  and  I  have 
heard  him  preach  and  have  intitled  his  sermons  sentence  for 
sentence,  and  have  perceived  that  his  mind  is  much  more 
against  the  abusing  of  these  things  than  against  the  things 
themselves.  .  .  .  In  myjudgementby  that  that  Iknowof  Master 
Latimer's  mind  now  (if  he  might  have  your  licence)  he  would 
open  his  mind  on  this  matter  that  the  people  should  be  con- 
tent, and  this  would  please  the  Council  of  the  Town  well,  for 
upon  this  they  be  agreed  and  hopeth  upon  your  good  help  in 
it.  And  if  I  may,  with  my  little  understanding,  further  this 
matter  to  bring  it  into  a  unity  as  God  is  my  Judge;  and  if  he 
(quod  absit)  should  hereafter  say  anything  that  should  sound 
otherwise  than  the  Catholical  determination  of  the  Church, 
there  will  be  (those)  I  know  that  will  be  ready  to  note  it  with 
more  diligence  than  hitherto.  The  above  was  my  conscience, 
though  it  were  for  a  time  erroneous,  and  deceived  for  lack  of 
taking  heed  diligently  to  mark  and  know  the  abuse  of  a  thing 
from  the  thing.  The  which  cause  I  shall  reserve  secretly  to 
myself  lest  I  should  seem  to  put  other  men  in  guilty  of  my 
facts  that  I  do  not  intend.  God  willing  who  have  you  in  His 
protection.    Written  in  Bristol,   2nd  May 

"  By  me,  Friar  John  Hilsey,  Doctor 
and  Prior  of  the  Friars  Preachers  there."1 

This  letter  has  been  reproduced  almost  in  full,  since  it  helps 
one  to  understand  the  rather  tangled  and  changing  attitude  of 
honest  men  towards  the  preaching  of  the  Reformers.  At.  first 
their  attacks  on  Catholic  doctrine  were  answered  by  the 
defence  of  the  points  of  controversy ;  but  it  then  appeared  that 
even  men  like  Latimer  had  no  desire  really  to  overturn  the 
Faith,  but  only  those  abuses  in  practice  which  Catholics  them- 
selves were  quick  enough  to  admit  and  lament.  Hence  Hilsey 
and  other  intelligent  Dominicans  like  him  began  to  find  some 
sympathy  towards  the  stirring  preachers,  though  resolute  to 
avoid  whatever  really  might  develop  into  denials  of  articles 
of  Faith. 

Then  in  Norwich  on  Easter  Monday,  two  years  later,  the 
Prior  of  the  Dominicans  there,  Friar  Edmund  Harcock, 
preached  a  sermon  which  caused  some  commotion.  His  own 
copy  or  digest2  (Treasury  of  Receipts  of  Exchequer :  vol  A  3/1 1, 
P.  R.O.  fol.  23)  is  marked  by  him  at  the  end  with  this  candid 
and  quaint  confession:  "The  said  Harcock  confesseth  him- 
self to  be  neither  God  nor  angel,   but  man  which  may  err, 

1  Reliquary,  1888,  pp.  78,  79. 

2  Ibid.,  1889,  p.  99;  Letters  and  Papers  of  Henry  VIII,  vol.  vii,  p.  237; 
vol.  viii,  p.  254. 


Zhe  TReformation  155 

wherefore  if  he  have  erred  in  any  man's  judgement  he  is 
content  to  submit  himself  under  the  correction  and  reforma- 
tion of  others  as  it  shall  please  his  superiors  under  the  King's 
grace  to  order  him."  The  sermon  itself  was  a  very  quiet  and 
careful  exposition  of  Catholic  doctrine.  He  uses  the  Easter 
morning  visit  of  the  holy  women  to  the  tomb  of  Christ  in 
order  to  anoint  His  dead  body  to  prove  "that  works  must 
needs  be  had  with  faith  annexed  thereto,  or  else  I  see  no 
scripture  to  our  commendations."  Then,  though  with  some 
difficulty,  he  managed  to  squeeze  out  the  angel's  declaration, 
the  teaching  apposite  to  his  times,  "  that  the  word  or  the 
sentence  of  God  determined  is  ever  infallibly  fulfilled,"  and 
therefore  takes  precedence  of  the  "word  or  decree  of  man," 
which  "  is  found  sometimes  fallible."  This  is  reinforced  by  an 
appeal  to  the  Books  of  Daniel,  Esther,  and  Ezechiel. 

Skilfully  this  is  made  clearly  applicable  to  "present 
politics,"  for  an  appeal  was  then  launched  for  prayers  for  the 
King,  "chief  lord  of  this  land,  also  supreme  head  of  the 
Church  of  England,  and  a  singular  friend  to  the  Cambridge 
and  Oxford  scholars  of  our  order,"  for  "our  most  honour- 
able lady  Anne  the  Queen's  good  grace,  my  lady  princess, 
with  other  of  the  substitutes  both  spiritual  and  temporal." 
After  this  passing  tribute  to  Henry  and  Anne  Boleyn,  he  pro- 
ceeded in  a  rather  detached  spirit  to  speak  about  the  state  of 
Jerusalem,  the  wickedness  of  the  priests  and  the  defiling  of 
virgins  and  the  breaking  down  of  altars  and  relics,  as  de- 
picted by  the  prophets.  Again  he  very  carefully  lets  his 
audience  understand  that  he  is  referring  to  other  places  than 
Jerusalem,  and  other  times  than  those  of  the  prophets,  by 
protesting  over-much  against  any  one's  thinking  his  words 
to  apply  to  "any  act  within  this  realm  proclaimed,  or  to  be 
proclaimed." 

He  enjoyed  evidently  talking  rather  in  the  air,  and  then 
coming  down  with  a  bump  by  pretending  he  is  not  making 
any  remarks  about  present  controversies,  and  thus  repeatedly 
insisting  on  them  the  more.  To  the  question  as  to  who  are 
the  disciples  of  Christ,  he  answered  they  are  to  be  found  in 
every  walk  in  life,  "  fishing  and  knitting,  and  keeping  courts 
and  court  revels  "  ;  nor  are  these  to  be  accused  of  hypocrisy 
or  phariseeism  who  enter  into  cloister  in  cowls,  "  some  white, 
some  black,  betokening  castity  and  forsaking  the  world," 
while  others  "go  cloaked  in  frocks  of  red  betokening  out- 
wardly love  of  God,  charity,  and  pity  of  the  poor."  They  are 
no  more  pharisees  than  any  one  else  so  long  as  they  "in- 
wardly do  well  what  is  this  garment  outwardly";  but  should 
they  really  only  pretend  to  a  goodness  at  which  they  do  not 
aim,  then  they  can  as  well  be  hypocrites  as  others  whose 
"hoods  are  lined  with  silk  or  fur."  Not  the  cowl  makes  the 
pharisee,  nor  the  want  of  it  saves  a  man  from   hypocrisy; 


156  XTbc  lEnglisb  Dominicans 

but  a  hypocrite  is  to  be  judged  by  his  thoughts  and  in- 
tentions. 

Innocent  really  as  the  whole  sermon  now  reads,  it  appar- 
ently excited  much  controversy  in  the  city.  Cromwell  had  by 
this  time  ordered  the  visitation  of  the  monasteries,  and  had 
picked  as  his  chief  instrument  to  annoy  the  Dominicans, 
Richard  Ingworth,  Prior  of  the  Noviciate  house  at  King's 
Langley,  who  later  for  his  services  to  the  court  was  con- 
secrated Bishop  of  Dover.  Ingworth  wrote  to  Cromwell, 
sending  along  with  the  sermon  a  description  of  its  effects. 
It  appears  that  Harcock  had  had  in  his  audience  "  the  mayor 
and  the  substance  of  the  city,"  whom  the  sermon  offended, 
so  that  at  their  request  Ingworth,  in  virtue  of  his  visitorial 
authority,  "sequestered  the  said  friar  commanding  him  to 
write  his  sermon."  The  mayor  himself  immediately  after  the 
sermon  when  Harcock  "came  out  of  the  pulpit  said  to  him 
that  he  marvelled  what  moved  him  to  meddle  with  such 
matters,"  but,  seeing  "so  great  people,  would  make  no 
business,  but  required  him  to  come  to  him  afterwards  that 
he  might  commune  with  him."  The  prior  evidently  suspected 
what  such  familiar  communing  really  signified,  for  he  made 
no  effort  to  hasten  it  unduly,  and  sent  a  messenger  to  answer 
"  that  he  was  not  at  home."  At  this  the  mayor  too  desisted, 
apparently  glad  to  be  relieved  of  further  complications,  but 
Ingworth  "sequestered  the  person,  and  still  have  him  in 
custody  till  I  know  your  further  pleasure."  Of  this  further 
pleasure  we  are  ignorant,  for  Harcock  thence  after  is  not 
mentioned.1 

Meanwhile  Hilsey,  who  had  become  now  Provincial,  was 
appointed  on  13  April  1534,*  along  with  the  Provincial  of  the 
Austin  Friars,  to  make  a  visitation  of  the  five  Orders  of 
friars,  noting  their  behaviour,  their  fidelity  to  their  vows 
and  rule,  and  their  general  good  fame  among  their  neigh- 
bours. Where  they  stood  in  need  of  it,  reform  was  to  be 
imposed  on  them,  above  all  the  royal  supremacy  was  to  be 
insisted  upon,  even  to  the  extent  of  calling  in  the  secular  arm 
to  enforce  its  acceptance  should  any  reluctance  be  notified. 
A  long  way  Hilsey  had  gone  in  that  short  interval.  First  he 
had  been  indignant  and  furious  with  Latimer  whom  he  judged 
to  be  an  enemy  of  Catholic  doctrine,  then  he  seemed  to  dis- 
cover that  Latimer  after  all  was  merely  a  reformer  of  customs 
which  even  Catholics  could  quite  easily  acknowledge  to  be 
evil  over-growths,  finally  he  had  come  to  acknowledge  that 
Latimer  was  not  only  to  be  tolerated  but  to  be  followed.  The 
years  that  came  after  brought  affluence  to  some  of  the  visita- 
tors,  who  found  nice  comfortable  nests  with  wealth  attached. 
Not  so  Friar  John  Hilsey.    His  ways  were  always  hard,  and 

1  Reliquary,  1889,  p.  99. 

2  D.  N.  £.,  vol.  ix,  pp.  884-885. 


Ube  IRefonnation  157 

life  grew  less  certain  than  in  the  older  monastic  days.  Of 
course  seeing  the  direction  the  royal  favour  was  taking, 
other  friars  were  determined  not  to  be  out-bid  by  their  Pro- 
vincial, and  some  few  of  them  jumped  even  farther.  Four 
days  later  Robert  Stroddle,  Prior  of  the  London  Preachers, 
"doctor  of  sacred  science,"  freely  and  of  his  own  will,  and 
with  the  unanimous  consent  of  the  whole  convent,  affixed  his 
signature  to  the  deed  accepting  the  royal  supremacy,  which 
had  been  signed  also  by  the  London  Priors  of  Austin  and 
Carmelite  Friars,  and  the  Guardian  of  the  Franciscans.1 

Certainly  there  were  bloody  reasons  to  suggest  unanimous 
consent  to  the  luckless  Dominicans.  "  This  year"  (notes  the 
Chronicle  of  the  Grey  Friars  of  Londoii) ,  ' '  was  the  maid  of 
Kent  with  the  monks,  friars,  and  the  parson  of  Aldermary 
drawn  to  Tyburn,  and  then  hanged  and  headed  the  v  day 
of  May,  and  the  monks  buried  at  the  Blackfriars,  the  observ- 
ants with  the  holy  maid  at  the  Greyfriars,  and  the  parson  at 
his  Church,  Aldermary." 2  On  the  very  same  day,  5  May  1534, 
Friar  Richard  Ingworth,  Prior  of  King's  Langley,  and  Friar 
John  Coton,  Prior  of  Dunstable,  with  the  full  and  free  con- 
sent of  their  communities  sign  the  deed  whereby  are  acknow- 
ledged the  "chaste  manage,"  between  Henry  and  Anne 
Boleyn,  together  with  any  marriage  into  which  after  Anne's 
death  the  King  may  hereinafter  enter,  the  royal  headship  of 
the  English  Church,  the  authority  of  the  Bishop  of  Rome  as 
no  greater  than  that  of  the  English  prelates  within  their  own 
dioceses,  the  sovereignty  of  the  laws  of  parliament  as  against 
any  foreign  jurisdiction,  the  need  of  interpreting  scripture 
only  according  to  the  traditions  of  the  orthodox  Catholic 
doctors.  With  these,  on  the  same  deed  of  acceptance,  signed 
also  the  Franciscan  Guardians  of  Aylesbury,  Ware,  and 
Bedford,  and  the  Carmelite  Prior  of  Hitching.3  After  that 
one  by  one  the  Dominican  Priories,  according  as  the  visitors 
approached  them,  gave  in.  They  do  not  indeed  all  appear  to 
have  subscribed  the  royal  supremacy,  but  they  certainly 
handed  over  their  priories  to  the  King's  good  pleasure. 

Symptoms,  however,  do  appear  to  show  that  there  was 
still  dissatisfaction  strong  enough  to  find  voice  up  and  down 
the  Province.  At  Exeter  we  hear  of  "  Mr.  Charnocke  "  who 
may  well  be  F.  Thomas  Charnock,  accused  of  saying  hard 
things  about  the  Provincial,  for  which  he  appears  to  have 
been  put  in  prison.4  Cranmer,  writing  to  Cromwell  7  June 
1534,  alludes  to  "Friar  Oliver,"  prior  of  the  Blackfriars  of 
Cambridge,  which  is  not  only  a  man  of  very  small  learning, 
sinister  behaviour,  ill  qualities,  and  of  suspected  conversation 
of  living  (as  by  the  letters  of  divers  well  learned  personages 

1  Merry  England,  1889,  pp.  280-281.  2  Ibid.,  p.  281. 

3  Reliquary,  1879,  p.  21  ^;   1881,  p.  13. 

4  B.M.  Cotton  MSS.,  Cleopatra,  E.  VI,  art.  20,  fol.  202. 


158  XTbe  j£nglisb  Dominicans 

of  the  same  university,  whereof  I  have  sent  you  one,  I  have 
been  credibly  informed),  but  is  also  the  very  same  man  which 
of  all  others  most  indiscretely  preached  against  the  King's 
grace's  great  cause,  and  most  defended  the  authority  of  the 
Bishop  of  Rome,  and  of  all  men  most  inapt  to  bear  any  rule 
in  so  noble  a  university,  by  whom  also  a  great  number  of  the 
best  learned  in  the  same  is  much  offended;  wherefore  I  pray 
you  to  be  a  mean  that  he  may  be  removed  from  that  office,  and 
that  Dr.  Hilsey  or  some  other  worshipful  man  may  have  it. 
There  be  in  the  same  house  of  the  blackfriars  men  of  good 
sturdy  living,  learning,  and  judgement;  and  pity  it  were  that 
they  should  have  such  a  head  and  ruler  as  is  of  like  qualities. 
And  I  delivered  unto  you  about  Easter  last  past  or  else  afore 
a  certain  billet  containing  such  matter  as  the  same  friar 
Oliver  preached  in  the  last  Lent,  which  bill  if  ye  had  remem- 
bered I  doubt  not  but  that  you  would  have  provided  for  some 
other  friar  afore  this  time ;  albeit  (if  it  may  please  you  now  to 
remember  him),  there  is  no  time  yet  lost,  but  that  the  same 
may  be  renewed  again."1 

Friar  Oliver  also,  perhaps  the  same,  perhaps  another 
(namely,  Friar  William  Oliver,  Prior  of  the  Dominicans  of 
Bristol),  on  7  May  1537,  was  accused  of  having  said  many 
things  altogether  repugnant  to  the  King's  grace.  With  him 
it  was  the  theology  of  the  new  religion  that  was  most  to  be 
abhorred,  and  the  matter  of  his  discourses  as  set  down  by 
various  witnesses  on  oath  is  a  very  just  and  moderate  state- 
ment of  Catholic  doctrine,  so  fair  and  just  that  he  willingly 
agreed  to  as  much  of  the  newer  teaching  as  might  be  held 
without  loss  of  true  religion.  "  First  concerning  justification, 
he  said  that  faith  alone  justifieth  as  it  does  appear  in  diverse 
places  of  Scripture,  and  that  a  man  could  not  fruitfully  work 
before  he  was  justified  by  faith  in  Christ,  and  that  he  so 
justified  must  needs  work  and  see  to  the  edifying  and  necessity 
of  his  neighbour,  and  that  this  faith  could  no  less  be  unprofit- 
able or  without  works  than  the  Sun  without  his  beams  or 
light,  nor  as  the  good  tree  or  fresh  green  plant  could  not 
choose  but  bring  forth  good  fruit,  even  so  might  not  faith  be 
void  or  barren  without  good  works.  Secondly,  ...  he  said 
that  although  one  had  ten  cart-loads  of  cowls  and  friars' 
habits,  whether  they  were  of  Francis  Order  or  of  S.  Dominic's, 
of  which  he  was  one  himself  (and  that  if  that  might  do  good 
he  thought  his  order  one  of  the  eldest  in  England),  yet  that 
could  not  avail  without  faith,  nor  a  whole  ship  laden  with 
friars'  girdles,  nor  a  dung-cart  full  of  monks'  cowls  and  boots, 
would  not  help  to  justification.  .  .  .  Also  he  prayed  God  there 
were  no  privy  nor  thin  hearts  nor  close-festered  stomacks 
among  them,  as  he  trusted  there  were  none  but  that  every 
man  might  be  true  to  God  and  to  his  prince  as  they  ought  to 

1  Reliquary \  1885,  p.  210. 


TTbe  IRefonnatton  159 

be,  and  as  they  are  bound  by  the  law  of  God."  A  fair  estimate 
of  the  Catholic  attitude  towards  the  vexed  questions,  theo- 
logical and  political.1 

On  26  August  1536  another  Dominican  Prior  was  reported 
to  Henry  VIII  as  also  opposed  to  the  new  ideas  as  regards 
the  Bishop  of  Rome.  It  is  Cranmer  who  makes  the  report/ 
detailing  in  general  how  he  himself  had  delivered  two  sermons 
in  Canterbury  against  the  Pope  as  God's  Vicar  on  earth 
("  although  he  was  so  taught  this  three  or  four  hundred 
years")  and  "though  my  two  sermons  were  long  ...  I  was 
informed  by  sundry  reports  that  the  people  were  glad  .  .  . 
until  such  time  as  the  Prior  of  the  Blackfriars  of  Canterbury 
preached  a  sermon  as  it  was  thought  and  reported  clean 
contrary  unto  all  the  three  things  which  I  had  preached 
before."  The  said  prior  upbraided  the  Archbishop  for  his 
want  of  charity  towards  the  Bishops  of  Rome,  saying 
"openly  to  me  in  a  good  audience  that  he  knew  no  vices 
of  none  of  the  Bishops  of  Rome";  but  above  all  he  even 
dared  to  declare  that  "the  Church  never  erred,"  which,  as 
Cranmer  pointed  out,  could  only  mean  that  Henry  certainly 
had.  This  point  Cranmer  indeed  labours  with  much  skill  and 
no  humour,  ending  with  a  demand  for  the  immediate  punish- 
ment of  the  friar  and  much  gratitude  "for  the  stag  which 
your  Grace  sent  unto  me  from  Windsor  Forest,  which  if  your 
Grace  knew  for  how  many  causes  it  was  welcome  unto  me, 
and  how  many  ways  it  did  me  since,  I  am  sure  you  would 
think  it  much  the  better  bestowed." 

Just  a  year  later,  25  May  1537,  the  Prior  of  York  suffered 
the  penalty  of  death.  He  had  had  a  hand  in  the  great  rebel- 
lion of  the  North,  so  that  politics  may  be  said  partly  to  have 
entered  into  the  cause  of  his  execution.  For  that  reason  he 
does  not  at  present  appear  in  the  list  of  official  martyrs  until 
his  case  has  been  morethoroughly  tested.  State  papers  speakof 
his  recantation  or  confession  ;  but  the  value  of  these  official  con- 
fessions can  hardly  be  taken  as  matter  of  serious  acceptance.3 
Certainly  at  Tyburn  he  was  "  hanged,  headed  and  quartered  " 
along  with  three  others :  "  And  that  same  day  at  Tyburn  was 
a  young  friar  of  the  Blackfriars  brought  up,  for  because  he 
desired  the  heart  of  him  that  brought  him  up,  to  have  it  and  to 
burn  it,  the  sheriff  sent  him  to  Newgate,  and  there  he  was  a 
fortnight  or  more  "  {Chronicle  of  the  Grey  Friars  of  London.) 

It  is  to  be  noticed  that  all  these  who  gave  trouble  to  the 
King  and  his  friends  were  actual  priors  of  houses,  superiors 
chosen  by  their  own  brethren  to  rule  them.    No  doubt  there 

1  Reliquary,  1888,  p.  79. 

2  Archaeologia  Cantiana,  vol.  vii,  pp.  13,  14. 

3  Letters  and  Papers  of  Henry  VIII,  vol.  xii,  Nos.  479,  609,  698,  786, 
1019,  1021,  1207. 

*  B.M.  Cotton  MSS.,  Vitellius,  F.  XII,  fol.  350". 


160  Zhc  jBngMsb  ^Dominicans 

was  no  thought  of  what  was  to  happen  when  the  elections  of 
these  various  staunch  defenders  of  Catholic  doctrine  took 
place,  so  that  the  significance  cannot  absolutely  be  accepted 
as  representative  of  the  Province's  attitude  to  the  King;  yet, 
for  all  that,  it  can  certainly  be  submitted  as  good  evidence  of 
the  condition  of  the  English  Dominicans  that  down  to  the 
very  verge  of  the  dissolution  the  superiors  elected  were  in  so 
many  cases  strong,  vigorous,  and  devoted  to  the  Faith.  The 
Prior  of  Newcastle  is  another  to  be  added  to  this  sturdy  band. 
So  bold  was  his  advocacy  of  the  Pope's  authority,  that  at  last, 
in  imminent  peril  of  life,  he  left  his  convent  and  fled  over 
the  border,  addressing  this  letter  to  the  fathers  and  brethren 
of  the  convent  of  Blackfriars  in  Newcastle.  "  Fathers  and 
brethren,  I  recommend  me  unto  you,  desiring  to  hear  of  your 
good  welfare,  which  Jesu  preserve  ever  to  His  pleasure,  etc. 
The  cause  of  my  writing  to  you  is  this  time  to  show  that  for 
fear  of  my  life  I  am  fled,  for  because  of  my  preaching  in 
Advent  and  also  in  Lent  the  first  Sunday,  I  am  noted  to  be 
none  of  the  King's  friends,  though  albeit  that  I  love  the  man 
as  a  true  Christian  man  ought  to  do,  but  by  cause  that  I  have 
not,  according  to  the  King's  commandment,  in  my  sermons 
prayed  for  him  as  the  supreme  head  of  the  Church,  neither 
declaring  him  in  my  sermons  to  be  the  supreme  head  of  the 
Church,  but  rather  contrary  I  have  declared  S.  Peter  the 
Apostle  and  his  successors  to  be  Christ's  Vicars  on  earth,  and 
that  unto  Peter  Christ  gave  the  care  and  charge  of  all  the 
churches  of  the  world,  and  that  unto  other  apostles  Christ 
gave  the  care  and  charge  of  other  particular  churches,  some 
of  one  country  and  some  of  another  (thus  did  I,  the  forenoon 
of  the  first  Sunday);  of  the  which  words  it  followeth  that  the 
King  cannot  be  the  supreme  head  of  the  Church  of  England 
but  rather  the  successors  of  Peter.  I  was  also  admonished 
shortly  to  preach  in  Newcastle,  and  both  to  pray  for  him  as 
the  supreme  head  and  also  so  to  declare  him  unto  the  people, 
which  thing  I  cannot  do  lawfully,  first  because  it  is  against 
the  Scripture  of  God,  taken  in  a  true  sense ;  second,  it  is 
against  the  doctrine  of  the  Church  Catholic  and  apostolic,  as 
it  appeareth  in  the  decrees,  decretals,  etc.,  which  doctrine  I 
was  sworn  openly  in  the  University  of  Oxford  to  declare  it  to 
my  power,  and  ever  to  stick  unto  it,  and  that  I  should  never 
affirm  anything,  neither  in  schools  nor  in  preaching  nor  else- 
where that  is  contrary  to  the  determination  of  the  same 
Church,  Catholic  and  apostolic.  Thirdly,  that  it  is  against 
many  general  councils.  Fourthly,  that  it  is  against  the  inter- 
pretation of  all  the  holy  doctors  as  Irenius,  Cyprian,  Augustine, 
Jerome,  etc.  Fifthly,  that  it  is  against  the  doctrine  of  all  the 
Universities  and  general  Schools  of  all  Christendom,  a  few 
certain  universities  excepted,  lately  corrupt  and  poisoned  with 
Luther's  heresies.    Sixthly,  that  it  is  against  the  consent  of  all 


Zhc  IReformation  161 

Christian  people  which  has  received  Peter's  successors  as 
supreme  head  of  the  Church  Catholic  evermore  unto  this  time. 
Seventhly,  that  is  against  my  profession  which  I  made  to  be 
obedient  unto  the  Master  of  the  Holy  (Dominican)  Order  and 
successors  according-  to  the  institutions  of  Friars  Preachers, 
who  in  it  evidently  declare  that  ordo  noster  est  summo  Pontijici 
Romano  immediate  subjectus.  For  these  seven  causes  I  cannot 
lawfully  do  as  I  was  commanded  of  the  King  by  his  letters, 
neither  as  I  was  admonished  of  his  servant  and  chaplain. 
Wherefore  I  could  not  abide  in  England  without  falling  in  the 
King's  indignation,  which,  as  the  Scripture  says,  is  death  : 
Indignatio,  inquit,  principis  mors  est.  Thus  I  have  thought  it 
better  for  me  to  flee  and  give  place  to  ire  as  Christ  com- 
manded me  to  do,  and  as  both  He  and  His  disciples,  with 
many  other  good  men,  have  done  and  dayly  do,  than  I  would 
tarry  and  preach  false  doctrine  against  my  conscience,  or  yet 
to  tarry  and  suffer  death  as  others  have  done,  for  spiritus 
quidem  promptus  est  caro  autem  infirma.  I  am  in  heart  well 
willing  to  die  in  these  my  opinions,  notwithstanding  I  feel  my 
flesh  grog  with  death.  Wherefore,  Fathers  and  dear  brethren 
all,  for  the  premises  in  this  present  writing  I  give  up  my  office 
and  request  you  to  choose  you  another  prior.  Secondly,  I 
beseech  you  all  to  pray  for  me  as  your  poor  brother  in  Christ, 
and  now  in  Christ's  cause  departed  from  you.  So  committing 
myself  to  you  in  Jesu,  who  ever  save  you  all,  as  I  would  be 
saved  myself.    Amen. — Vester,  Richardus  Marshall."1 

Not  very  heroic,  perhaps,  was  the  attitude  of  Friar  Richard ! 
He  had  certainly  no  wish  to  die,  and  still  less  any  desire  to 
conform  his  conscience  to  what  it  could  not  approve;  to  solve 
the  problem  he  fled  to  Scotland.  He  was  not  the  only  Do- 
minican to  seek  his  safety  beyond  the  Cheviots.  Robert 
Buchenham,  Prior  of  Cambridge,  was  another  who  could 
not  face  persecution,  nor  yet  had  greatness  enough  to  accept 
martyrdom ;  for  him  Edinburgh  proved  some  sort  of  anchor- 
age till  he  could  eventually  ship  over  to  Louvain,  where  were 
together  the  recusant  members  of  Oxford  and  Cambridge  Uni- 
versities. There  Theobald,  Cranmer's  spy,  met  him  on  31  July 
1535,  "and  another  of  his  brethren  with  him  .  .  .  where  he 
with  his  companion  doth  continue  in  the  house  of  the  Black- 
friars  here  and  have  little  acquaintance,"  and  wrote  to  the 
Archbishop  to  explain  that  the  Dominicans  had  no  part  in 
the  arrest  and  execution  of  Tyndale  for  heresy.2  However, 
the  letter  is  useful  as  showing  that  Scotland  was  evidently  a 
place  of  refuge  for  the  English  friars  who  could  face  neither 
martyrdom  nor  apostasy,  and  that  from  it  some  at  least  went 
to  the  Low  Countries,  where  in  the  priories  of  their  own 
Order,  without  political  or  other  intrigue,  they  quietly  prayed 
away  their  lives. 

1  Reliquary,  1878,  pp.  163-164.  2  Ibid.,  1885,  p.  210. 

M 


1 62  XTbe  Bnglisb  Dominicans 

But  there  were  others,  perhaps  many  others,  who  were 
fain  to  comply  with  parliamentary  enactments  and  be  classed 
among"  the  "  King's  friends."  For  Maurice  Griffiths,  "  a  poor 
friar  and  scholar  of  the  University  of  Oxford,"  Hilsey  implored 
Cromwell's  aid  that  the  young  man's  studies  should  not  be 
interrupted.1  His  political  and  religious  attitude  was  evidently 
of  a  nature  to  please  the  Court,  for  Hilsey  notes  in  his  favour 
that  he  "at  the  last  Chapter  answered  de  primatu  Romani 
Pontificis."  But  at  the  very  same  time  John  Hilsey  himself 
seems  to  have  fallen  under  some  suspicion  of  his  own  full 
acceptance  of  royal  doctrine,  since  he  wrote  also  in  1534  to 
Cromwell  to  complain  that  the  Bishop  of  London  would  not 
let  him  preach  at  "  Paul's  Cross,"  unless  he  previously  signed 
certain  articles  of  belief.  As  a  matter  of  fact  Hilsey,  though 
he  was  billed  to  preach  there  on  the  morrow,  had  no  intention 
of  so  doing,  but  desired  instead  that  his  place  should  be  taken 
by  him  "  that  came  from  Norwich  to  the  intent  that  he  might 
declare  his  mind  to  the  King's  grace's  matters."2  No  doubt 
it  was  Friar  Edmund  Harcock  who  was  to  be  given  his 
chance.  But  of  what  actually  happened  there  is  at  present 
silence. 

But  the  new  Prior  at  Norwich  was  eager  to  show  his 
gratitude  for  his  promotion.  "At  S.  Leonard's  without 
Norwich  upon  Ascension  eve  in  the  year  of  Our  Lord  1535," 
he  introduced  into  the  bidding  prayer  a  petition  "for  our 
Sovereign  Lord  King  Harry,  of  the  Church  of  England,  chief 
head  so  called."  However,  at  some  length  he  took  pains  to 
explain  "that  the  King  should  be  head  in  ministering  of 
sacraments,  or  in  incensing,  or  other  such  I  deny  and  will  in 
any  place  in  the  world,"  for  it  is  only  "the  King  is  their 
head  in  temporalibus."  He  admits,  indeed,  that  even  this  was 
a  breach  with  the  past  so  that  "men  will  marvel  why  I 
change  my  tale,"  but  he  now  sees  that  "  the  Bishop  of  Rome 
by  the  Scripture  of  God  hath  no  more  power  than  the  Bishop 
of  Ely.  How  came  the  Bishop  of  Rome  by  this  power?  By 
man's  ordinance,  by  general  councils,  and  by  the  grant  of  the 
whole  ocean  (?).  And  whether  other  countries  have  taken  this 
from  him  or  no,  I  cannot  tell,  but  this  I  know  well  that  the 
whole  Council  of  this  realm  hath  taken  this  authority  from 
him.  Here  will  some  say,  Sir,  you  seem  to  speak  against 
yourself,  seeing  that  your  Order  was  confirmed  by  the  Bishop 
of  Rome.  To  this  I  say  that  so  long  as  the  Bishop  of  Rome 
was  in  authority,  the  fathers  Benet,  Dominic,  and  Francis 
did  well  in  going  to  him  to  have  their  rules  approved.  I 
shall  put  you  a  familiar  example,  though  it  be  gross.  Father 
Pennyman  and  others  too  that  he  rehearsed  were  priors  here, 
men  did  well  to  obey  them,  but  after  that  such  had  taken 

1  Ellis,  Miscellaneous  Papers,  Series  II,  vol.  xvii,  no.  57. 

2  Ibid.,  vol.  xviii,  no.  282. 


XT  be  Reformation  163 

their  authority  from  them,  as  might  well  enough  (be),  now 
no  man  oweth  obedience  unto  them."1 

Here,  then,  it  is  explicitly  admitted  (what  indeed  could  be 
ignorantly  denied  only  after  the  lapse  of  centuries)  that  the 
jurisdiction  of  Rome  had  been  till  then  acknowledged  all  over 
these  islands ;  still  it  was  contended  that  this  was  not  jure 
divino,  but  only  by  man's  ordinances ;  hence  the  argument 
was  that  Catholics  had  a  right  to  withdraw  from  obedience 
to  the  Holy  See,  though  not  from  any  doctrine  or  sacrament 
that  was  part  of  Catholic  Faith.  Among  the  Dominicans  who 
sided  with  the  crown  there  was  little  enough  sympathy  with 
heresy  against  the  doctrinal  positions  of  the  Church,  but 
there  was  certainly  a  large  body  that  did  not  realize  what 
was  really  involved  in  separation  from  the  Papacy.  The  posi- 
tion is  stated  as  ably  as  possible  in  the  so-called  King's  Book, 
which  developed  a  theory  of  branch  churches  that  angered 
deeply  the  reformers  under  Edward  VI  and  Elizabeth,  butserved 
to  bridge  over  the  gradual  change  from  Henry  VIII's  schis- 
matic Church  to  the  heretical  Church  of  the  post-Marian  days. 

Friars  like  James  Cosyn,  Prior  of  Winchester,  who  were 
suspected  of  Lollard  tendencies,  were  straitly  examined. 
Report  quoted  these  words  of  his:  "If  thou  put  a  whole 
stoop  of  holy  water  upon  thy  head,  and  another  stoop  of 
other  water  upon  thy  head,  the  one  shall  do  thee  as  much 
good  as  the  other  in  avoiding  of  any  sin.  As  much  other 
bread  of  thy  own  blessing  shall  do  thee  as  much  good  as  so 
much  holy  bread.  And  as  for  confession  I  will  not  counsel 
thee  to  go  to  any  priest  to  be  confessed,  for  thou  mayest 
confess  thyself  as  well  to  a  layman,  thy  Christian  brother,  as 
to  a  priest,  for  no  bishop  or  priest  have  any  power  to  assoil 
any  man  of  any  sin ;  and  I  myself  have  shriven  a  woman  this 
day  in  this  Church,  but  I  did  not  assoil  her,  neither  will  I 
never  assoil  none."2  It  was  on  26  February  1536,  that  the 
accusation  of  Protestantism  was  made  against  him ;  by 
24  April  of  the  same  year  he  had  been  set  at  liberty  on 
accepting  the  authority  of  "our  supreme  head  next  to 
Christ,  the  King's  grace."3  Presumably,  therefore,  he  threw 
over,  if  he  had  ever  really  held,  the  opinions  reported  of  him, 
for  it  was  Hilsey,  as  Bishop  of  Rochester  (an  unworthy  suc- 
cessor to  Cardinal  Fisher,  just  twelve  months  earlier  de- 
prived of  his  See),  who  gave  him  licence  and  liberty  to  preach 
"  the  word  of  God  sincerely." 

Another  whom  we  hear  of  as  imprisoned  for  false  doctrine 
was  found  on  examination  only  to  have  taught  that  "all 
curates  and  priests  should  hereafter  be  more  diligently  ex- 
amined of  their  learning,"  though  the  result  of  this  would 

1  Letters  and  Papers  of  Henry  VIII,  vol.  viii,  p.  254. 

2  B.M.  Cotton  MSS.,  Cleopatra,  E,  IV,  no.  85,  fol.  127. 

3  P.R.O.  Lib.  A.,  T.  R.  S.,  fol.  230. 


1 64  Zhc  Bnglisb  Dominicans 

be,  he  quite  realized,  to  reduce  the  clergy  "to  one  priest 
only  for  one  church."  Here  then  again  there  is  no  real 
question  of  heresy,  though  Dr.  London,  who  championed  the 
cause  of  this  "  blackfriar  of  Northampton  ...  in  much  misery 
this  cold  winter,"  adds  ominously  that  the  good  friar  refused 
"  old  fantasies  and  pious  tales."  l  It  is  clear  again,  therefore, 
that  there  is  no  case  observed  so  far  of  Protestantism,  but 
only  of  subservience  to  the  royal  authority,  and  a  complete 
acceptance  of  Henry's  masterful  headship.  A  good  deal  later, 
namely,  in  the  reign  of  Elizabeth,  come  cases  like  Faithful 
Comyn,  once  a  Dominican  and  later  a  Puritan  preacher.  But 
he  stood  alone,  as  far  as  we  know,  from  the  rest  of  the  Pro- 
vince.2 His  examination  before  the  Queen  and  Council  is 
most  amusing  reading,  for  he  had  reasons  ready  for  every 
question,  and  had  repeatedly  to  be  withdrawn  from  the 
Council  before  they  were  able  to  think  of  an  answer  and 
continue  the  argument  with  him.  But  we  learn  from  it : 
Friar  Comyn  described  himself  as  ordained  priest  by  Cardinal 
Pole  and  since  then  having  thrown  up  all  forms  of  prayer, 
"  misliking  the  Church  of  England  as  much  as  ever  he  mis- 
liked  the  Church  of  Rome."  Eventually  he  was  bound  over 
to  reappear,  but  on  his  reappearance  was  again  put  off  as  on 
that  day  the  Spanish  Ambassador  had  audience  of  the  Queen 
who  herself  wished  to  preside  over  the  trial.  No  longer  on 
bail,  Friar  Comyn  fled  over  sea  to  the  Low  Country  and 
eventually  got  "  clapt  up  in  prison"  by  Pope  Pius  V,  who 
sent  for  him  and  personally  questioned  the  apostate.  Even 
the  Pope  fell  a  victim  to  his  charm,  released  him  and  pre- 
sented him  with  money,  "2,000  ducats  for  his  labour,"  re- 
ported the  English  spies.  Sought  for  in  the  Low  Countries 
by  royal  officers  from  England,  he  was  helped  "into  Romish 
holdings  "  where  he  was  lost  sight  of,  and  presumably  returned 
to  the  faith  of  his  early  years. 

For  the  rest  the  English  Dominicans  made  no  attempt  to 
join  the  Protestant  party.  Richard  Ingworth  offers  himself 
merely  to  be  Cromwell's  host  in  the  priory  at  King's  Langley, 
promising  him  as  good  lodging  and  provision  as  he  can, 
"and  for  a  poor  token  I  send  to  your  Mastership  a  poor 
Suffolk  cheese  and  half  a  dozen  conies."1  On  28  July  1538, 
he  wrote  to  Cromwell:  "  God  shall  be  my  judge,  my  friar's 
heart  was  gone  two  years  before  my  habit,  save  only  my 
living."4  Just  since  so  short  a  time  had  the  unsettlement 
begun.  John  Hodgkin,  "which  of  late  was  Provincial  of  the 
Order  of  Blackfriars,"  implored  Cromwell,  "  right  honourable 
and  most  prudent,"  "to  look  with  your  eye  of  pity  and  let 

1  Reliquary,  1880,  p.  31. 

2  B.M.  Old  MSS.  (Clarendon  MSS.,  Cod.  XV),  No.  4783,  art.  43^ 
fol.  101. 

3  Reliquary,  1879,  p.  215.  k  Ibid.,  p.  215,  note  a. 


Zhc  Reformation  165 

not  your  poor  orator  in  decay  which  might  yet  a  long  time, 
God  willing,  do  some  service  and  always  might  be  ready  to 
do  unto  you  such  service  and  pleasure  as  ye  would  command 
him,  whom  ye  shall  find  always  to  the  King's  majesty  a  faithful 
and  true  subject,  and  ever  to  do  in  the  most  lowly  manner 
such  service  as  he  shall  be  commanded."    It  is  all  very  un- 
pleasant and  cringing  on  John  Hodgkin's  part;  but  he  was 
very  poor,  as  were  all  the  dispossessed  religious,  had  no  work 
to  do,  and  was  evidently  overcome  by  his  ill-fate  ;   "a  man  in 
favour  of  the  world  hath  many  friends,  but  once  depressed 
or  cast  down  then  none  or  few."    He  signed  himself  a  "  poor 
religious  servant."1    Eventually,  both  he  and  Stroddle  were 
appointed  to    the    See    of   Bedford,  fellow    Dominicans,   yet 
jealous  of  each  other,  and  fearing  and  uncertain  of  what  was 
to  be  their  lot.     Hodgkin  secured  the  Bishopric  and  Stroddle 
was  intruded  into  Dartford  as  President  over  the  Dominican 
nuns  there.    The  good  Prioress,  Jane  Fane,  "  the  which  hath 
been  this  forty-nine  years  unworthy  governor  of  this   poor 
house,"  wrote  to  Cromwell  to  protest  against  the  appoint- 
ment.'2 The  Bishop  of  Rochester  had  had  Stroddle  to  live  with 
him,  but  finding  they  could  not  get  on  had  prompted  his  re- 
moval to  the  nuns,  where  he  was  an  incessant  nuisance  to  the 
whole  community:  "and  this  great  unkind  deed  my  Lord  of 
Rochester  did,  for  he  knew  him  better  than  I,  and  to  put 
himself  in  quietness  he  hath  put  me  far  from  it."     In  des- 
pair, since    Cromwell    would    not  relent,   the  nuns  perforce 
put  up  with  his  company,  granting  him  ^5  a  year  in  memory 
of  his  "  good  and  faithful  service."  3   This  grant  was  enrolled 
in    the  Court  of  Augmentations  some  years  later.     Neither 
was  Hodgkin  much  happier  in  his  surroundings.  The  bishopric 
still  left  him  "  in  much  poverty  and  misery,  the  cause  thereof 
hath  been  not  being  able  to  make  suit  to  your  good  Lordship 
to  have  your  favour,  nor  yet  nor  ever  shall,  unless  it  be  by 
your  noble  and  gentle  heart,  but  continually  depressed,  stand- 
ing ever  in  danger  of  your  displeasure,  which  never  did  nor 
never  will  deserve,  or  to  do  anything  whereby  he  should  run 
in  any  danger  of  suspicion  by  any  relation  made  at  any  time 
to  your  good  Lordship.     And  if  your  prudence  and  high  dis- 
cretion hath  esteemed  and  judged  at  any  time  that  your  said 
orator  hath  not  done  all  his  duty,  nor  so  well  as  that  he 
should  at  anytime,  he  most  meekly  and  lowly  desireth  of  your 
noble  heart  and  godly  mind  to  ascribe  his  folly  of  ignorance 
and  not  of  wilfulness,  being  now  and  at  all  times  ready  to  do 
such  service  as  ye  shall  think  meet.  Trusting  that  if  he  might 
once  have  such  grace  and  comfort  in  your  goodness  as  many 

1  Ellis,  Series  II,  vol.  xvii,  no.  72:  P.R.O.  J?.  P.,  [29)tHen.  VIII,  p.  5, 

m-  32  (»4)'  .  ... 

2  Miscellaneous  Books  of  Court  of  Augvie7itahons,  vol.  xcvni,  fol.  118. 

3  Ellis,  Series  II,  vol.  viii,  nos.  45  and  43. 


1 66  Ufee  English  Dominicans 

a  one  hath,  ye  should  perceive  your  said  orator  should,  with 
the  best  of  his  power,  after  his  wit  and  cunning,  do  as  hearty 
and  true  service  as  he  can  to  the  furtherance  thereof ;  your 
said  orator  hath  now  made  labour  to  my  Lord  Chancellor, 
my  Lord  of  Canterbury,  the  Bishop  of  Rochester,  all  they 
making-  promises  to  be  suitors  to  your  Lordship,  but  yet 
trusting  much  more  to  your  noble  and  gentle  heart  than  in 
all  that  manner  of  suit  your  orator  is  thus  bold  to  direct  this 
supplication,  and  so  end  to  be  your  true  orator  and  diligent 
servant  at  your  commandment.  And  thus  I  pray  our  Lord 
send  you  long  life  with  continual  prosperity." 

Cromwell  does  not  seem  to  have  done  anything  for  him. 
Later  he  managed  to  pick  up  some  preferments,  and  under 
Edward  VI  married;  on  Mary's  accession  he  professed  peni- 
tence, repudiated  his  schism  and  his  wife,  and  was  admitted 
to  the  rectory  of  S.  Peter's,  Cornhill.  Under  Elizabeth  he 
again  conformed,  recovered  his  prebend  of  Harleston  attached 
to  S.  Paul's,  which  he  had  lost  under  Mary,  but  was  removed 
from  Cornhill.1  He  must  have  died  somewhere  about  June 
1560.  Then  again  there  was  one  Gregory  Dodds,  Prior  of 
Cambridge,  who  surrendered  the  convent  to  the  Visitors. 
Cranmer  gave  him  a  living  in  Kent,  and  this  touch  of  favour 
set  him  going  gaily  up  the  hill  of  preferment.  Subsequently 
he  became  Dean  of  Exeter,  and  as  a  member  of  Convocation 
signed  the  Thirty-Nine  Articles  and  helped  to  push  forward 
two  petitions  to  the  bishops,  one  for  the  disuse  of  curious  sing- 
ing and  playing  organs,  of  the  cross  in  baptism  and  of  copes 
and  surplices,  the  other  on  behalf  of  the  well-known  petition 
for  discipline.    He  died  ten  years  later  than  Hodgkin  in  1570.2 

The  fourth  Dominican  to  become  a  bishop  of  the  reformed 
Church,  together  with  Ingworth,  Hilsey,  and  Hodgkin,  was 
another  Cambridge  friar,  John  Scory.  In  1541  he  was  Cran- 
mer's  chaplain,  and  secured  one  of  the  six  select  preacher- 
ships  in  Canterbury  Cathedral.  That  year,  in  a  sermon  there 
on  Palm  Sunday,  he  preached  against  crosses,  blest  candles, 
holy  water,  ringing  of  bells  against  thunder,  the  intercession 
of  the  saints,  prayers  in  Latin,  the  consecration  and  rich 
ornamentation  of  churches.  Under  Henry  he  was  in  some 
peril  for  his  extreme  Protestant  views;  under  Edward  VI  he 
prospered.  He  preached  against  Joan  Bocher,  who  was  con- 
demned to  be  burnt  for  Unitarian  opinions,  and  in  his  sermon 
set  out  to  refute  her;  but  she  told  him  he  "  lied  like  a  rogue 
and  had  better  go  home  and  study  the  Scriptures."  However, 
he  was  in  royal  favour,  was  made  Bishop  of  Rochester,  then 
of  Chichester,  and  by  this  time  had  got  himself  a  wife.  On 
the  accession  of  Mary,  he,  like  Hodgkin,  repudiated  both 
Protestantism  and  wife,  and  was  allowed  to  exercise  priestly 

1  Archaeological  Journal,  1878,  pp.  30-33. 
-  Reliquary,  1885,  p.  211. 


Ube  IReformation  167 

powers  in  London.  At  last  he  fled  with  his  wife  over  sea  to 
Geneva,  and  returning-  on  Elizabeth's  accession,  was  made 
Bishop  of  Hereford,  in  which  office  he  died  at  a  very  advanced 
ag-e  in  1585.1 

But  there  was  one  who,  though  not  by  birth  an  Englishman, 
gave  a  splendid  example  to  his  fellow  friars  in  these  islands. 
Bishop  of  Llandaff  and  confessor  to  Queen  Catherine  of 
Aragon,  George  Athequa  of  Aragon  had  accompanied  the 
young  princess  on  her  first  arrival  in  150 1.  As  her  friend  and 
official  chaplain  he  soon  got  dragged  into  the  divorce  pro- 
ceedings, and,  alone  of  all  the  English  Episcopate,  voted 
with  Bishop  Fisher  "  the  marriage  in  question  was  not  against 
natural  and  divine  law  and  that  the  Pope  could  dispense." 
Fisher  was  sent  to  the  Tower,  but  Athequa,  as  a  Spaniard 
and  one  of  the  few  who  could  confess  the  Queen  in  Spanish 
("in  which  speech  she  ever  confessed  and  cannot  be  in  any 
other,  as  she  saith  "),  was  allowed  to  remain  in  attendance  on 
Catherine.  Writing  to  Henry  about  him,  the  Duke  of  Suffolk 
describes  him  as  a  "  man  of  most  simplicity  and  shall  do  less 
harm  to  tarry  and  be  her  Ghostly  father."  He  steadily  refused 
to  take  the  oath  which  acknowledged  the  validity  of  the 
King's  marriage  with  Anne  Boleyn,  and  thereby  found  him- 
self in  the  inspiring  company  of  Bishop  Fisher  and  Sir  Thomas 
More.  Still,  imprisonment  in  his  case  meant  merely  that  he 
was  forbidden  to  leave  his  own  house,  though  no  restriction 
was  set  on  his  personal  freedom,  so  that  he  was  able  to  be  by 
the  dying  Queen,  saying  Mass  for  her  and  communicating 
her.  He  attended  her  funeral,  acting  as  deacon  at  the  High 
Mass  sung  at  Peterborough  Cathedral,  where  she  was  buried. 
Then,  endeavouring  to  escape  out  of  the  country  disguised 
as  a  sailor,  he  was  brought  back  and  committed  to  the  Tower. 
But  Chapuys  at  last  got  him  delivered  and  sent  to  Spain 
without  molestation.  Here  in  1549  he  died  quietly  in  the 
great  Dominican  convent  of  Calatayud,  where  he  had  begun 
his  religious  life.2 

While  provincials  were  thus  cringing  to  royal  authority, 
though  priors  might  preach  and  protest,  it  was  to  be  ex- 
pected that,  of  the  other  friars,  some  at  least  succumbed, 
though  it  is  not  easy  to  say  to  what  extent  they  accepted  the 
religious  changes.  Most  of  the  houses  of  the  South,  Ingworth 
mentions  as  in  "  good  order"  and  therefore  needing  no  refor- 
mation, except  that  there  was  too  much  going  out  to  say 
Mass,  and  thus  the  priories  were  not  themselves  properly- 
served  by  the  small  communities  that  inhabited  them.  This 
was  at  Winchester,3  but  here  the   Prior  of  the    Blackfriars 

1  Reliquary,  1885,  p.  211. 

2  Gumbley,  O.  P. ,  Irish  Ecclesiastical  Record,   Feb.    1916.     The  name 
should  really  be  d'Ateca. 

'■'  Reliquary,  1889,  p.  213. 


1 68  ube  lEnglisb  Dominicans 

asked  for  leave  to  continue,  as  with  them  there  was  no  such 
"  celebration  abroad."  The  Bishop  of  Winchester  and  "also 
the  Mayor  came  and  desired  that  the  said  Prior  should  have 
the  house."  Ingworth  would  give  them  no  certain  answer  till 
he  had  heard  from  Cromwell.  Subsequently  he  bade  Cromwell 
refuse  their  request.  But  everywhere  he  found  extreme  penury, 
and  expresses  his  fears  about  the  friars  who,  at  the  suppres- 
sion of  the  priories,  would  be  turned  adrift.  The  pensions 
were  utterly  inadequate  and  uncertain,  so  that  only  the  priors 
who  sold  their  convents  and  managed  to  make  something  that 
way  would  be  able  to  support  themselves.  Yet  he  notes  that 
all  were  willing  to  surrender  to  the  King,  despite  the  dark  pro- 
spect that  loomed  ahead.  Even  the  visitors  themselves  got  little 
benefit  out  of  their  plunder,  for  "the  poor  people  thoroughly 
in  every  place  be  so  greedy  upon  these  houses  when  they  be 
suppressed  that  by  night  and  day,  not  only  of  the  towns  but 
even  of  the  country,  they  do  continually  resort  as  long  as  any 
door,  window,  iron  or  glass,  or  loose  lead  remaineth  in  any  of 
them.  And  if  it  were  so  done  only  where  I  goy  the  more  blame 
might  be  laid  to  me,  but  it  is  universally  that  the  people  be 
thus  greedy  for  iron,  windows,  doors,  and  lead.  In  every  place 
I  keep  watch  as  long  as  I  tarry,  and  prison  those  that  do  thus 
abuse  themselves  and  yet  others  will  not  refrain  ";  thus  wrote 
John  London  after  suppressing  the  friars'  houses  in  Warwick 
in  November  1538.1 

In  Worcester  there  was  further  opposition  of  an  odd  kind ; 
from  Gloucester  the  Bishop  of  Dover  tells  Cromwell:  "  Divers 
of  the  friars  are  very  loath  to  forsake  their  houses,  and  yet 
they  be  not  able  to  live,  for  I  think  for  the  more  part  of  them, 
if  all  their  debts  should  be  paid,  all  that  is  in  their  houses  is 
not  able  to  do  it.  .  .  .  Blackfriars  at  Worcester  is  a  proper 
house  without  any  lead,  and  may  dispend  by  year  in  rotten 
houses  about  20  nobles  by  year  (not  all  is  in  decay).  There 
was  an  ankress  with  whom  I  had  not  a  little  business  to  have 
her  grant  to  come  out,  but  out  she  is."'"  The  sudden  end- 
ing to  the  brawl  between  recluse  and  bishop  suggests,  in 
the  clever  phrasing  of  it,  a  dramatic  and  by  no  means  silent 
exit. 

At  Rhuddlan,  after  giving  an  inventory  of  the  goods  of  the 
Blackfriars  there,  the  Treasury  of  Receipt  of  Exchequer 
records  the  following  note:  "  the  altar  of  alabaster,  the  stalls 
in  the  choir,  and  the  bells  in  the  steeple  be  not  priced.  There 
were  two  Kine  and  five  hogs  priced  at  22s.,  and  with  the 
money  the  servants  paid,  and  a  bedridden  friar  provided  for, 
and  other  young  friars  rewarded  so  that  no  penny  was  left, 
and  corn  was  in  the  ground  for  which  the  Prior  and  friars 
paid  the  charges  of  the  Visitor  and  so  departed."  3 

1  Ellis,  Series  III,  vol.  iii,  p.  138. 

2  Reliquary,  1878,  p.  28.  3  Ibid.,  1886,  pp.  1 19-120. 


XTbe  IReformation  169 

At  Oxford  the  friars  were  reduced  "to  that  conformable 
fashion  of  living-  as  other  honest  priests  do  use."  1 

The  main  impression  then  to  be  gained  from  all  this  is  that 
the  English  Province,  as  a  whole,  surrendered  each  of  its 
houses,  but  did  not  accept  the  religious  innovations  of  the 
King.  The  Provincial  was  on  the  side  of  the  royal  authority, 
the  priors  opposed  it.  The  friars,  set  between  their  local  and 
central  leaders,  generally  did  nothing,  but  escaped  if  they 
were  able  to,  either  over  seas  to  France,  or  the  Low  Countries 
or  Spain,  or  went  North  to  Scotland  or  West  to  Ireland. 
Such  as  remained  lapsed  and  drifted  into  poverty,  or  else 
entered  the  ranks  of  the  secular  clergy.2  The  Registers  of 
the  Master-General  in  Rome  are  only  preserved  for  certain 
years,  but  give  in  their  present  fragmentary  state  much  the 
same  impression  as  the  English  official  documents  suggest, 
only  they  emphasize  still  more  strongly  the  scattered  result 
of  the  persecution.     Under  1541  occurs  this  entry: 

"  Friar  John  Lyall  has  licence  to  remain  in  the  Province  of 
France  or  in  the  Province  of  Germany,  and  to  receive  the 
order  of  priesthood  by  permission  of  the  prior  of  any  convent 
who  is  willing  to  receive  him  and  of  celebrating  mass " ; 
under  1546,  "To  Master  Richard  Marshall  and  to  Friar 
Henry  dwelling  in  the  Province  of  Scotland  by  letters  patent, 
is  given  licence  to  remain  with  the  Bishop  of  Brecon,  outside 
the  cloister,  but  wearing  their  habits,  in  such  sort  that  they 
are  not  to  be  judged  to  be  exempted  from  the  jurisdiction  of 
the  Order."  Under  1547,  "To  Friar  John  of  England,  priest, 
in  the  convent  of  Chios,  in  the  Province  of  Lombardy,  it  is 
granted  that  after  he  shall  have  been  there  two  years,  he  can- 
not be  held  there  against  his  will  but  has  licence  to  leave  the 
said  convent  and  island  and  seek  his  superiors  to  whom  he  is 
commended." 

After  this  disorganization  of  the  Province  came,  during  the 
short  reign  of  Queen  Mary,  a  brief  interlude  of  rest.  The 
beautiful  church  of  S.  Bartholomew's,  Smithfield,  was  handed 
to  the  Dominicans  in  1555,  where  William  Perin  was  insti- 
tuted Prior  by  the  Master-General,  and  made  at  the  same  time 
Vicar-General  of  the  English  Province  as  there  was  no 
machinery  of  election  either  for  priorship  or  provincialate.3 
At  the  first  outbreak  of  the  schism  Perin  had  found  refuge  in 
Flanders,  returning,  however,  later  to  continue  his  degree 
work  at  Oxford  and  settling  in  London,  though  we  have  no 
record  of  his  place  of  residence  in  the  capital.  Under  Edward, 
the  Protestant  temper  of  the  Government  was  too  fierce  for 

1  Reliquary,  1883,  p.  216. 

2  The  lost  register  of  Master-General  John  de  Ferrario  (1532-1538)  is 
said  to  have  contained  lists  of  two-thirds  of  English  Province  assigned 
to  other  provinces. 

3  Merry  England,  1889,  P-  Z^°- 


170  TLbc  English  Dominicans 

him  and  he  escaped  again  into  Flanders,  but  reappeared  as 
Prior  of  the  new  foundation.  His  community  seems  to  have 
consisted  largely  of  foreign  friars,  so  that  it  is  difficult  to 
know  how  far  this  venture  can  be  looked  upon  as  the  work  of 
the  English  Province.  Perin,  however,  was  a  very  zealous 
preacher,  and  three  of  his  sermons  were  printed  in  England, 
1 546- 1 548:  "  Thre  godly  and  most  learned  sermons  of  the 
most  honourable  and  blessed  Sacrament  of  the  Aulter."  He 
has  left  also  a  treatise  on  the  frequent  celebration  of  Mass, 
and  some  "  Spiritual  exercises  and  ghostly  meditations."  He 
died  at  Smithfield,  and  was  buried  by  the  high  altar  in  the 
Priory  Church. 

To  him  succeeded  Richard  Hargrave,  who  was  elected  by 
the  friars,  though  he  was  not  an  actual  member  of  the  com- 
munity, since  he  was  acting  chaplain  to  the  Dominican  nuns 
at  Dartford.  The  Master-General  made  him  in  Perin's  place 
Vicar  of  the  Province.1  But  meanwhile  Mary  died,  and  before 
the  letters  patent  for  him  arrived  from  Rome,  Elizabeth  had 
begun  to  show  her  anti-papal  sympathies.  Religious  life  was 
prohibited,  and  once  again  the  organization,  such  as  it  was, 
of  the  Province  failed.  The  s\ib-Prior,  into  whose  hands  the 
letters  came,  fearing  the  penalties  of  Praemunire,  handed 
them  to  the  Privy  Council,  with  the  result  that  Hargrave 
never  occupied  his  post  at  S.  Bartholomew's,  but  returned  to 
Dartford,  and  thence  with  the  nuns  went  into  Flanders,  till 
his  death  in  1566.2 

Under  Mary,  two  of  the  friars  came  into  prominence  as 
bishops.  One,  John  Hopton,:'  was  domestic  chaplain  to  the 
princess  during  the  reign  of  Edward  VI.  He  had  graduated 
at  Oxford  and  at  Bologna;  returning  to  his  old  university  he 
became  elected  Prior.  In  spite  of  his  foreign  travels  he,  for 
some  reason,  asked  leave  to  preach  in  English  at  S.  Frides- 
wide's,  instead  of  in  Latin  at  S.  Mary's,  as  was  customary  for 
the  Divinity  Doctorate.  In  1533  he  had  completed  all  his 
examinations,  and  no  doubt  continued  to  teach  until  he  was 
appointed  to  his  Court  Chaplaincy.  He  does  not  appear  to  have 
been  molested  under  Henry  or  Edward.  In  1554  the  Queen 
named  him  Bishop  of  Norwich,  but  he  died  within  a  few 
weeks  of  the  Queen's  own  death  at  the  end  of  1558,  thus 
avoiding  the  troubles  that  followed.  The  other  prelate  was 
Maurice  Griffiths,  on  whose  behalf  Hilsey  wrote  to  Cromwell 
for  leave  and  money  to  continue  his  studies  at  Oxford  in 
1534.4  This  is  curious,  for  we  know  that  on  5  July  1532  he 
was  admitted  Bachelor  of  Divinity,  and  15  February  1533 
Bachelor  of  Canon  Law.   It  is  difficult  to  conceive  what  further 

1  Alerry  England,  1889,  p.  361. 

-  Ibid.,  pp.  362-363;  cf.  Oxford  Dictionary,  Letter  G,  p.  103,  col.  3. 

1  Reliquarv,  1883,  pp.  211-212. 

4  Ibid.,  1884,  p.  227;  D.  N.  B.,  vol.  viii,  pp.  677-678. 


Ubc  IReformation  171 

finishing  he  required,  nor  could  it  have  been  very  easy  for 
Cromwell  to  realize  his  position  when  Hilsey  described  him 
as  "  a  poor  scholar."  After  this  he  entered  the  ranks  of  the 
secular  clergy,  becoming  Archdeacon  of  Rochester  after  1536, 
and  finally  Bishop  of  Rochester.  Here  he  followed  Scory 
and  Hilsey,  who  themselves  had  succeeded  to  Fisher.  The 
only  reason  that  one  can  suggest  why  Rochester  should  have 
been  put  into  Dominican  hands  is  that  of  economy,  for  at  the 
Dominican  Convent  of  Dartford  they  found  a  residence,  cheap, 
congenial,  and  central.'  Under  Mary,  who  appointed  him  to 
his  See,  he  showed  himself  zealous  for  the  Faith,  but  had  no 
further  test  put  to  the  sincerity  of  his  profession,  since  he 
died  just  later  than  his  sovereign,  but  before  Elizabeth  had 
definitely  broken  with  the  Holy  See. 

Oxford  during  the  same  brief  interlude  saw  once  again 
Dominicans  in  her  midst,  for  Peter  Soto  and  John  de  Villa- 
gacia,  from  Spain,  lectured  there  from  1555  to  1558  at  Mag- 
dalen College.2 

But  these  were  the  mere  flickerings  of  the  flame  before  all 
its  brightness  went  out.  From  1221,  since  the  friars  had  first 
entered  England  till  the  end  of  Mary's  reign  in  1558,  there 
had  been  a  continuous  Dominican  life  up  and  down  the  king- 
dom. The  English  Provincial  ruled  over  a  larger  number  of 
houses  than  did  any  other  Dominican  Provincial,  for  subject 
to  him  were  fifty-three  houses  in  his  own  borders,  and  almost 
to  the  close  of  the  fifteenth  century  he  administered  Ireland 
and  Scotland  by  means  of  his  Vicars.  There  had  been  patiently 
built  up  a  well-organized  band  of  friars,  with  an  education 
secured  to  them  that  could  not  be  surpassed  by  any  other 
religious  in  England.  Learning  and  study  were  the  proper 
purpose  of  the  Order,  for  preaching  and  teaching-  were  the 
particular  form  of  its  activity.  Graded  from  priory  to  priory, 
from  arts  and  science  and  philosophy  and  theology  to  the 
higher  courses  of  the  special  university  lectureships,  the 
Dominican  curriculum  was  unique  in  Christendom  for  its 
order,  its  thoroughness,  and  its  high  standard  of  attainment. 
Working  out  from  this  central  power  the  Friars  Preachers 
settled  themselves  deeply  in  the  national  life.  They  influenced 
public  opinion  in  favour  of  representative  government,  and 
especially  just  that  one  form  of  it  which  became  established 
in  the  British  Constitution.  As  confessors  of  kings  they  took 
part,  officially  and  unofficially,  in  the  counsels  of  the  realm; 
as  ambassadors  and  messengers  on  the  King's  service  they 
arranged  treaties  and  staved  off  war,  as  cardinals  in  Rome 
and  bishops  within  the  realm  they  had  their  share  also  in 
ecclesiastical  politics,  defending  English  interests  abroad  and 

1  Though  now  in  the  diocese  of  Canterbury,  Dartford  was  in  the  dio- 
cese of  Rochester  during  the  whole  time  the  Dominican  nuns  lived  there. 

2  Antony  Wood,  Athenae  Oxonienses  (1721),  p.  141. 


172  Uhe  Englisb  Dominicans 

Roman  interests  at  home.  In  the  more  spiritual  spheres  of 
Catholic  life  they  had  also  done  no  small  work  by  preaching-, 
confessing,  writing,  lecturing,  stimulating  the  piety  of  their 
Christian  people.  Even  beyond  the  borders  of  their  own  four 
seas,  missionary  enterprise  had  fired  their  adventurous  ambi- 
tion, and  driven  them  over  the  mountains  of  Armenia  and  in 
the  cities  of  Asia  Minor,  as  again  later  it  was  to  plant  their 
successors  as  pioneer  bishops  in  North  America. 

Then  all  this  glorious  edifice  was  down-toppled  at  the 
Reformation.  The  masterful  brutality  of  Henry,  the  priggish 
piety  of  Edward,  the  craft  and  skilful  strength  of  Elizabeth 
wholly  defeated,  and  for  a  time  destroyed,  the  patient  labour 
of  years. 

On  the  other  side  we  do  believe  that  there  must  first  have 
been  some  failure  within  to  have  allowed  such  influence  and 
power  without.  But  in  the  end,  weakened  within,  struck  at 
without,  the  fair  upbuilding  of  the  Province;  its  foundation, 
its  adornment,  its  glory  was  broken  down,  so  that  of  it  to 
this  day  there  hardly  remains  a  stone  upon  a  stone. 


GREAT  YARMOUTH,  SOUTH-WEST  TOWER  OF 
DOMINICAN  PRIORY 


[To  face  p.  17^ 


CHAPTER  IX 
THE  REORGANIZATION 

THE  sad  last  days  of  the  English  Province  under 
Elizabeth  are  recorded  by  Father  Richard  Har- 
grave,  Prior  of  S.  Bartholomew's-in-Smithfield. 
His  letter  to  the  Master-General,1  dated  i  October 
1559,  details  the  hopes  entertained  of  Elizabeth, 
the  sudden  appearance  of  her  Protestantism,  the  appointment 
of  Visitors  to  the  monasteries  and  convents  re-established  by 
Queen  Mary,  and  the  quick  suppression  first  of  religious  life, 
and  secondly  of  the  Catholic  Faith. 

The  English  members  of  the  Smithfield  Priory  who  re- 
mained in  England  conformed,  preferring  in  Hargrave's 
phrase  "to  remain  in  England  and  enjoy  the  flesh-pots  of 
Egypt  to  being  abject  in  the  house  of  the  Lord."  The  nuns 
of  Dartford  were  more  steadfast.  They  valiantly  refused  to 
accept  the  new  oath  and  the  new  Church  service,  and  toge- 
ther with  Father  Richard  and  three  English  Dominicans,  in 
much  poverty  and  with  many  hardships,  sought  asylum  in 
Flanders.2  The  aged  nuns  (among  whom  was  Elizabeth 
Wright,  the  half-sister  of  Bl.  John  Fisher,  to  whom  he  dedi- 
cated A  Spirituall  Consolation  .  .  .  at  suchetyme  as  hee  was 
prisoner  in  the  Tower  of  London)  went  first  to  Antwerp,  then 
to  Dendermond,  and  finally  settled  in  1573  in  the  convent  of 
Engelendael,  near  Bruges,  where  one  by  one  they  gradually 
passed  to  their  reward.  Hargrave  appears  to  have  lived  on 
with  them  for  some  years,  but  had  gone  before  they  had 
entered  among  their  Bruges  sisters.  For  some  time  he  had 
hoped,  with  the  other  three  friars,  to  return  to  England  and 
reorganize  the  scattered  Dominicans.  But  in  1565  he  died. 
He  was  succeeded  in  his  office  as  chaplain  and  also  as  Vicar- 
General  of  the  Province  by  Thomas  Heskyns,  O.P.,  who  had 
accompanied  the  sisters  in  their  flight;  but  he  does  not  seem 
to  have  remained  in  Flanders  as  his  predecessor  had  done,  for 
we  find  it  made  a  charge  against  Doctor  Philip  Baker,  Provost 
of  King's  College,  in  1569,  that  he  had  entertained  "Dr. 
Heskins,  the  famous  papist,  being  brought  to  his  table  at 
Cambridge  in  the  dark  and  conveyed  away  in  the  dark 
again."3  Moreover,  the  energetic  Vicar-General  took  up  his 
pen  also  in  defence  of  the  Faith,  and  replied  to  John  Jewell's 
celebrated  challenge  at  Paul's  Cross  in  a  quaintly  titled  work: 
The  Parliament  of  Chryste  avotiching  and  declaring  the  enacted 
and  receaved  Trueth  of  the  Presence  of  His  Bodie  and  Bloode 

1  Pio,   Vite  huomini  illustri  di  S.  Domenico,  p.  377,  and  Diary  of  Henry 
Machyn  (Camden  Society),  p.  171. 

2  Pio,  p.  377. 

3  Gillow,  Biographical  Dictionary  op  English  Catholics,  vol.  iii,  p.  292. 

173 


i74  TOe  Bnglisb  Dominicans 

in  the  Blessed  Sacrament  and  of  other  A  rticles  concerning  the 
same,  impugned  in  a  wicked  sermon  by  M.  Juel;  collected  and 
set  forth  by  Thomas  Heskyns,  Doctour  of  Divinitie  ;  wherein 
the  Reader  shall  fynde  all  the  Scripturs  commonlie  alleaged  out 
of  the  Newe  Testamente  touching  the  B.  Sacrament,  and  some 
of  the  Olde  Testamente,  plainlie  and  truly  expounded  by  a 
Nombre  of  holy  and  leamied  Fathers  and  Doctours.  Antwerpe 
1566.  Heskyns  was  a  man  of  culture,  having-  studied  at 
Oxford  and  become  a  fellow  of  Clare  Hall  at  Cambridge;  in 
this  last  quality  he  protested  against  the  amalgamation  of  his 
own  college  with  Trinity.  There  are  in  all  few  references  to 
him,  but  these  few  point  clearly  to  his  energy  and  his  import- 
ance in  English  Catholic  life.  Bromley's  Catalogue  of  En- 
graved Portraits  mentions  a  portrait  of  him  on  wood.  His 
death  must  have  occurred  while  he  was  in  England,  for  after 
1570  he  does  not  again  appear. 

Other  names  come  and  go,  English  Dominicans  we  know 
them  to  be,  but  have  hardly  had  left  to  us  more  than  their 
names:  William  Lester  or  Leslie  or  Lisle,1  Alexander  Rigby,2 
George  Foster,3  Henry  Clithero,4  the  son  of  Bl.  Margaret 
Clithero,  that  heroic  woman  whose  steadfast  martyrdom  is 
one  of  the  most  glorious  episodes  in  Catholic  history.  Two 
others  also  there  were  whom  Fr.  Parsons,  S.J.,  rather  un- 
scrupulously declares  in  his  Memoirs,  dated  1598,5  to  have 
become  apostates,  Alexander  Bayley  and  Friar  Sacheverell. 
But  to  have  entered  the  Order  of  S.  Dominic  was  almost 
enough  to  have  drawn  from  the  pen  of  that  zealous  and  narrow 
ecclesiastical  politician  a  fierce  invective  and  the  accusation 
of  heresy.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  Fr.  Rivers,  also  a  Jesuit, 
writing  in  1602,  says:  "Bayley  the  Dominican  is  still  kept 
close  prisoner  in  the  King's  Bench."8  That  was  on  15  Octo- 
ber; and  on  17  November  he  implies  that  Bayley  had  been  set 
free  and  again  recaptured  :  "  Momford  that  was  with  Tyrone, 
and  Bayley  a  Dominican  friar,  were  this  week  apprehended 
in  London  and  imprisoned."  A  year  later  Bayley  was  sen- 
tenced to  perpetual  banishment  and  is  no  more  heard  of. 
Sacheverell  seems  to  have  slipt  out  of  all  records,  and  we 
know  only  Parsons'  strictures  on  him,  but  as  he  and  Bayley 
are  mentioned  together  by  the  Jesuit,  it  may  well  be  that  this 
so-called  "apostate"  was  also  a  Confessor  of  the  Faith.  At 
any  rate,  Parsons'  assertions  by  themselves  carry  no  weight 
at  all  in  such  a  case. 

From  time  to  time,  from  foreign  priories,   English  friars, 

1  Knox,  Donay  Diaries  (1878),  vol.  i,  pp.  194,  197. 

-  Ibid.,  pp.  132,  154,  358.  3  Ibid.,  pp.  199,  201,  202. 

4  Ibid.,  pp.  222,  232. 

5  Catholic  Record  Society,  vol.  ii,  p.  208. 

6  Foley,  S.J.,  Records  of  the  English  Province  of  Society  of  Jesus,  vol.  i, 
pp.  51,  52,  675. 


ftbe  1Reoroam3at(on  175 

one  by  one,  came  to  labour  at  home  in  the  hunted  fashion  of 
those  heroic  days.  For  many  years  we  can  trace  only  broken 
records  of  them,  while  the  decrees  of  the  General  Chapters  of 
the  Order  imply,  without  giving-  any  details,  the  same  hardly- 
maintained  existence.  But  from  1570  till  1622  no  reference 
can  be  found  alluding  at  all  to  a  Vicar-General  of  the  Pro- 
vince, so  that  during  that  gap  it  is  not  known  who  actually 
administered  and  directed  the  Dominican  missionaries  in 
England.  For  a  long  time,  however,  the  most  prominent 
Friar  Preacher  in  England  was  a  Spaniard,  Diego  de  la 
Fuente,  confessor  to  Count  Gondomar,  Spain's  ambassador 
at  the  court  of  James  I.  Despite  his  foreign  birth,  he  was  so 
popular  with  the  English  priests,  that  the  assistants  of  the 
Archpriest  Harrison,  on  the  death  of  that  prelate,  petitioned 
for  Diego  to  be  made  Bishop  and  head  of  the  English  Church.1 
Realizing,  indeed,  that  such  a  dignity  was  no  attraction  to 
the  friar,  the  clergy  wrote  in  London  a  letter  to  him,  beseech- 
ing him  at  least  to  put  no  obstacle  in  the  way  of  such  a  happy 
consummation,  for  in  him,  almost  alone,  were  all  English 
Catholics  agreed  in  recognizing  a  divinely  chosen  leader.  But 
to  John  Bennet,  the  agent  of  the  English  clergy,  Diego  wrote, 
asking  his  aid  and  counsel  to  escape  a  honour  which  he 
judged  himself  wholly  unworthy  to  bear.2 

The  English  Dominicans  desired  no  less  that  Friar  Diego 
should  become  their  superior  also;  but  this  too  he  declined, 
suggesting  instead  the  name  of  Thomas  Middleton,  who  had 
begun  his  missionary  labours  in  England  in  1617.  Middleton, 
therefore,  was  appointed  by  the  Master-General  to  rule  the 
English  Province,  and  for  three  and  thirty  years  with  energy, 
caution,  and  success  did  his  best  to  establish  it  in  a  definite 
organization.3  From  his  time  onward  there  is  no  break  at  all 
in  the  succession,  and  the  continuity  of  the  English  Province 
was  assured.  There  is  then,  to  repeat,  just  a  stretch  of  fifty 
years,  during  which  time  we  can  as  yet  discover  no  definite 
superior  of  the  English  friars  ;  from  the  last  record  of  Thomas 
Heskyn  in  1570,  to  the  appointment  of  Middleton  on  8  July 
1622,  a  blank  occurs  which  we  cannot  at  present  supply.  Yet 
that  such  a  lapse  in  the  line  of  Provincials  and  Vicar-Provincials 
actually  happened,  does  not  seem  probable,  for  in  the  registers 
of  the  Master-General  (Seraphino  Sicci)  the  new  appointment 
is  thus  simply  referred  to:  "At  the  instance  of  Father  Master 
Didacus  de  la  Fuente,  Father  Thomas  Middleton,  English- 
man, was  made  Vicar  of  the  brethren  resident  in  England, 
with  power  to  exercise  that  authority  which  Vicars  of  Con- 
gregations, according  to  the  Dominican  constitutions,   have 

1  Tierney,  Dodd's  Church  History,  vol.  v,  pp.  ccclxvi  and  83. 

2  Ibid.,  p.  ccclxvii. 

3  Palmer,  Obituary  Notices  of  the  Friar  Preachers  or  Dominicans  of  the 
English  Province  from  1650  (1884),  p.  2. 


176  XCbe  Bttfllisb  Dominicans 

over  the  friars  subject  to  them."  '  No  hint  is  given,  no  sugges- 
tion made  as  to  this  being  a  new  departure,  though  at  the 
same  time  it  must  be  admitted  we  do  not  know  who  were  his 
predecessors. 

Thenceforward,  however,  we  begin  to  have  authentic 
records  like  this,  taken  from  the  register  of  the  Dominican 
Convent  of  Ghent:  "  1626,  29  September,  was  clothed  for  the 
English  Province  in  the  habit  of  our  Order,  under  Prior  Father 
Peter  Wosfynio,  Master  of  Sacred  Theology,  Father  Reginald 
Michaelis,  English  priest,  on  the  petition  of  the  Vicar-General 
of  England,  Father  Thomas  Middleton.  1627,  3rd  October,  on 
the  Feast  of  the  Holy  Rosary,  was  professed  for  the  Province 
of  England  Father  Reginald  Michaelis,  English  priest,  under 
Prior  Father  James  Vanden  Heede,  Licentiate  of  Sacred 
Theology,  and  on  the  day  following  his  profession  he  set  out 
for  England  whither  he  had  been  called  by  the  Vicar-General 
of  England."  2 

In  1635,  when  Panzani  visited  England,  he  counted  seven 
Dominicans  of  English  birth.3  This  was  a  considerable  fall 
in  numbers  apparently,  and  was  very  much  below  the  average 
of  the  long  reign  of  Elizabeth.  The  Vicar  of  the  Province  was 
evidently  exceedingly  disturbed  by  this  decrease,  and  used 
his  personal  influence  with  Queen  Henrietta  Maria  to  organize 
a  noviciate  in  London.  Leave  was  obtained  from  Rome,  and 
letters  patent  dated  24  June  1636  actually  arrived  in  Eng- 
land/ but  the  disturbance  of  the  great  rebellion  overthrew 
all  plans  for  settled  religious  life  in  these  islands.  Indeed,  the 
Vicar  for  his  offence  of  being  a  priest,  was  himself  seized  and 
thrown  into  prison  along  with  Fr.  Peter  Wright,  S.J.' 
Against  them  appeared  as  witness  Thomas  Gage,  an  apostate 
Catholic,  well  known  for  his  zeal  for  procuring  the  condemna- 
tion of  priests.  His  brother,  a  priest,  who  naturally  felt  the 
personal  shame  of  such  infamous  conduct,  wrung  a  promise 
from  the  informer  not  to  stain  his  hands  with  more  innocent 
blood.  As  far  as  Father  Middleton  was  concerned  Gage  kept 
his  word,  for  though  he  asserted  him  to  be  superior  of  the 
Dominicans  in  England,  he  added  that  such  an  office  need 
not  imply  the  priesthood,  since  S.  Francis  had  governed  his 
Order  while  remaining  a  layman.  The  Lord  Chief  Justice 
admitted  the  plea,  and  the  jury  acquitted  the  prisoner.  But 
against  the  Jesuit,  Thomas  Gage  (as  he  declared  in  court), 
had  some  old  grudge,  occasioned  by  an  ill  turn  done  him  by 
Fr.   Wright,   as  he  fancied,   in  prejudice  of  his  brother,   Sir 

1  Register  of Master-General  Sicci  (Archives,  Collegio  Angelico,  Rome), 
fol.  278. 

*  Ex  Registro  Conventus  Gandavensis,  fol.  16  sqq. 
3  B.M.  Add.  MSS.,  15389,  fol.  no. 

*  Register  of  Master-General  Rodolphus,  fol.  275. 

5  Foley,  S.J.,  vol.  ii,  pp.  521-522;  Tierney,  vol.  iii,  p.  133;  Challoner, 
Memoirs,  vol.  ii,  pp.  349,  354. 


Ube  IReorganisation  177 

Henry  Gage,  and  for  that  reason  certified  him  as  a  priest  and 
Jesuit,  and  deposed  that  he  had  often  assisted  at  the  father's 
Mass.  On  the  strength  of  this  evidence,  Fr.  Peter  Wright 
was  condemned  and  martyred  at  Tyburn  on  19  May  1651. 
The  Dominican  fellow-prisoner  was  deeply  saddened  at  the 
turn  of  events,  and,  lamenting-  his  own  loss  of  the  martyr's 
crown,  wrote  a  eulogy  of  Fr.  Wright.  Four  years  later 
Fr.  Thomas  Middleton  resigned  office,  and  died  on  18  May 
1664,  after  having  lived  long  enough  to  see  the  future  of  the 
English  Province  definitely  and  finally  assured.  Just  for  a 
brief  period  Fr.  James  Forbes,  another  Friar  Preacher,  held 
the  position  of  Vicar  of  the  Province,  for  he  is  declared  so  in 
the  registers  of  the  Master-General  to  the  date  of  17  April 
1640,  but  it  is  quite  possible  that  Forbes  refused  the  responsi- 
bilities, for  Middleton  is  mentioned  as  again  Vicar  almost 
immediately  after.1 

Besides  Middleton  and  Forbes,  we  know  who  were  Panzani's 
other  five  Dominicans  then  working  in  England,  Fr.  Thomas 
Catchmay,  who  succeeded  Fr.  Middleton  in  1655  ;2  Fr.  William 
Fowler,4  who  lived  in  his  family  home  at  S.  Thomas,  near 
Stafford,  where  long  were  preserved  two  pictures  of  his, 
S.  Dominic  and  S.  Thomas;  Fr.  Robert  Armstrong3  (1603- 
1683),  who  left  the  English  College  in  Rome  to  enter  the  Order, 
and  lived  many  years  in  Hexham;  Fr.  Thomas  Armstrong' 
(1607-1662),  the  younger  brother  of  Robert,  established  a 
mission  at  Stonecroft,  not  far  from  Hexham,  where  he  closed 
his  life  just  a  year  before  his  brother;  and  Fr.  David  Joseph 
Kemeys,  who,  with  Fr.  Middleton  and  Fr.  Catchmay,  laboured 
almost  all  his  life  in  London.6  Like  so  many  others  of  his 
brethren,  Fr.  Kemeys  was  a  prisoner  for  the  Faith;  and  even 
died  in  Newgate  for  his  supposed  participation  in  the  mon- 
strous plot  devised  by  Titus  Oates.  Previously  to  this  Fr.  David 
had  been  for  many  years  confessor  to  the  Countess  of  Arundel, 
who  was  still  alive  in  1675,  when  her  son,  Philip  Thomas 
Howard,  was  created  Cardinal.  To  bear  her  congratulations 
to  her  son,  Fr.  Kemeys  journeyed  that  year  to  Flanders ;  else 
all  his  days  were  spent  in  England. 

Besides  these  seven  Friars  Preachers,  who  represented  in 
failing  numbers  the  glories  of  older  times,  carrying  with  them 
traditions  and  privileges  that  had  arisen  or  been  given  in  the 
prosperous  past,  there  were  others  still  of  the  English  nation 
who  remained  in  foreign  convents  and  never  came  across  the 
seas  on  the  adventure  of  Faith,  friars  like  gentle  Gregory 
Lovel,  who  never  left  the  priory  at  Ghent,  where  he  had 
received  the  habit,  and  where  his  simple  and  austere  English 
piety  edified  his  brethren:  "O  dearest  brothers,"  he  said, 
as  he  lay  dying,  "  if  you  knew  how  tender  and  delicate  divine 

1  Obituary  Notices,  p.  2.  2  Ibid.  3  Ibid. 

4  Ibid.  5  Ibid.  s  Ibid.,  p.  3. 

N 


178  Ube  Bncjlisb  Dominicans 

grace  is,  you  would  carefully  guard  against  even  the  least 
transgression  of  the  Rule  and  Constitutions  from  one  break- 
ing of  the  silence."  ' 

But  the  failure  to  establish  a  noviciate  in  England  rendered 
the  existence  of  the  Province  extremely  precarious.  There  was 
little  hope  now  of  the  re-establishment  of  public  religious  life, 
as  had  seemed  possible  through  the  reigns  of  Elizabeth  and 
James,  and  there  was  therefore  no  definite  supply  whence  to 
England  could  come  the  English  friars.  The  older  fathers 
were  living  solitary  lives :  the  young  naturally  were  attracted 
to  other  Orders  where,  amid  their  own  countrymen,  they 
could  be  trained  for  the  difficult  but  inspiring  work  of  the 
English  mission.  Just  when  all  seemed  at  its  lowest,  God 
sent  into  the  vineyard  one  who  by  temperament,  family  con- 
nections, and  wealth  was  eminently  fitted  from  the  material 
standpoint,  and  by  grace  from  the  spiritual  standpoint,  for 
the  work  of  organizing  for  the  future  days  of  peace  the  English 
Dominican  Province.  Philip  Howard,  whose  brother  suc- 
ceeded to  the  Dukedom  of  Norfolk,  a  boy  of  dogged  de- 
termination, slow,  equable  in  temperament,  courageous, 
generous,  endowed  with  a  certain  native  piety  and  some 
happy  gift  for  the  management  of  affairs,  restored  the  scat- 
tered and  failing  Province,  and  insured  its  life. 

Born  on  21  September  16292  in  Arundel  House,  while 
Reubens  actually  was  a  guest  busy  painting  a  portrait  of  the 
grandfather,  the  Earl  of  Arundel,3  and  till  his  eleventh  year 
brought  up  in  the  luxury  and  refinement  of  that  exceptionally 
artistic  home,  Philip  followed  the  ordinary  course  of  English 
education.  Tutors,  according  to  the  custom  of  that  day,  were 
engaged  for  him  till  he  was  old  enough  to  go  to  S.  John's 
College,  Cambridge,  which,  however,  was  sufficiently  early  in 
life,  for  he  was  entered  with  his  two  brothers  as  fellow-com- 
moners in  1640.  Of  course  it  is  quite  possible  that  Philip 
merely  had  his  name  entered  on  the  rolls  and  never  attended 
the  University  at  all,  for  in  1641  he  accompanied  his  grand- 
father and  grandmother,  who  were  commissioned  to  escort 
Queen  Henrietta  Maria  abroad,  and  in  February  of  1642  he 
again  went  abroad  with  the  Earl  and  Countess,  who  finally  left 
England  with  the  Queen.  Though  the  Earl  of  Arundel  was 
by  title  the  Commander-in-Chief  of  the  forces  of  the  king- 
dom, his  temperament  was  artistic  rather  than  military,  and 
found  the  continent  more  comfortable  than  his  native  land 
during  the  Civil  War  between  King  and  Parliament.  Neither 
Earl  nor  Countess  ever  returned  to  England.  The  whole  family 
settled  down  at  Antwerp,  where  was  the  most  brilliant  as- 
sembly of  European  culture  at  the  time.    It  was  the  very  hey- 

1  Bclgia  Dominicaiia,  p.  101. 

2  Life  of  Philip  Ttwmas  Howard,  O.P.,  p.  79. 

3  Max  Roose,  Reubens  (French  translation),  p.  310. 


Ubc  IReorcjanisatton  1 79 

day  of  the  great  Flemish  revival  of  painting-  and  printing  and 
architecture,  not  perhaps  an  idealist  movement,  nor  wholly 
free  from  false  sentiment  and  coarse  realism,  yet,  for  all  that, 
at  the  time  the  most  alive  and  rich  in  expression. 

The  boy's  temperament  was  something  wholly  different 
from  his  grandfather's.  The  Earl  had  from  1615  conformed 
to  the  Established  Church  in  England,  and  though  his  King 
was  in  peril,  and  though  he  was  the  King's  official  General, 
he  remained  out  of  his  country  during  the  period  of  its  most 
fatal  war.  There  seems  to  have  been  little  steadfastness  in 
such  a  character,  yet  Philip  at  least,  whatever  else  he  lacked, 
had  no  lack  of  steadfastness.  His  determination  to  become  a 
Dominican  as  soon  as  he  came  across  an  Irish  Friar  at  Milan, 
was  at  once  opposed  by  the  whole  family.  It  seemed  a  small 
thing,  the  personal  affair  of  a  young  boy,  an  exile  on  a  journey, 
for  he  entered  the  Order  of  S.  Dominic  at  Cremona  on  28  June 
1645,  being  just  three  months  short  of  sixteen  years  of  age. 
A  small  thing  indeed,  the  act  of  a  boy  to  determine  his  own 
manner  of  life  !  The  Earl  was  furious.  He  wrote  to  the 
Countess  whom  he  had  left  at  Antwerp,  telling  her  "the 
saddest  news  of  Philip."  He  sent  his  agent,  John  Digby,  to 
Rome  to  gain  Pope  and  Cardinals  and  convict  the  friars  "  of 
impudency  and  misbeseeming  proceedings  "  in  having  received 
into  their  number  his  grandchild.  Even  that  nothing  might 
be  neglected,  the  boy's  brother  Henry  was  sent  to  use  per- 
sonal appeal;  "  I  had  two  or  three  hours  talk  with  him  in  the 
garden  alone,  and  I  think  I  told  him  as  much,  and  as  many, 
and  as  strong  reasons  and  persuasions  as  I  could  possibly 
think  of,  and  could  not  move  him  to  anything.  Only  when  I 
chid  him  for  his  disobedience,  and  told  him  how  unkindly 
your  Excellency  took  it  at  his  hands,  he  seemed  to  be  some- 
what moved  to  hear  how  much  your  Excellency  grieved  at 
his  loss,  yet  not  with  the  least  intent  ever  of  quitting  his 
habit,  telling  me  how  fully  he  was  resolved  to  pursue  his  firm 
purpose  through  life. "  The  Nuncio  at  Brussels  was  pressed  by 
the  Countess  into  the  service  of  her  Lord ;  a  memorial  was  pre- 
sented by  the  whole  Howard  family  petitioning  the  Sovereign 
Pontiff  to  exclude  Philip  from  ever  entering  any  religious  Order 
without  the  clearest  and  most  emphatic  papal  approval. 

But  Philip  had  also  his  protests  to  make,  and  these  were 
no  less  energetic  than  the  others.  To  quiet  his  family  he  had 
been  removed  from  his  convent.  He  was  now  allowed  to 
return  to  San  Sisto,  a  famous  Dominican  Priory  in  Rome, 
whence  he  sent  the  following  touching  letter  to  his  old 
grandfather : 

"  Dear  Grandfather, 

"  With  this  occasion  of  my  dear  brother's  returning 
back  to  Your  Excellency,  I  could  not  do  less  than  write  these 


180  Xlbe  i£ngUsb  Dominicans 

lines  unto  Your  Excellency  to  let  you  understand  how  sorry 
I  am  that  Your  Excellency  taketh  it  so  ill  that  I  have  made 
myself  a  friar;  for  God  Almighty  knoweth  that  I  would  never 
have  done  any  such  thing-  if  He  had  not  called  and  inspired 
me  thereunto.  Therefore  I  humbly  desire  Your  Excellency 
may  be  assured  that  I  do  not  fail  in  praying-  daily  both  for 
you  and  all  my  parents.  Therefore,  humbly  craving  your 
pardon,  both  for  this  and  all  the  rest  of  my  offences  and 
numbly  desiring  your  blessing,  I  remain  always,  from  our 
Convent  of  San  Sisto,  this  22nd  of  January  1646,  Your 
Excellency's  most  dutiful  and  obedient  grandchild 
"  Friar  Thomas  Howard, 

"  Of  the  Order  of  Preachers." 

Pope  and  Cardinals  and  the  Dominican  Master-General 
were  all  dragged  into  this  simple  affair  of  a  boy  of  sixteen 
who  would  be  a  friar.  Even  John  Evelyn,  gossip-in-chief  to 
English  social  life,  caught  and  noted  the  echoes  of  it:  "It 
was  an  Easter  Monday  that  I  was  invited  to  breakfast  at  the 
Earl  of  Arundel's.  I  took  my  leave  of  him  in  bed  where  I  left 
that  great  and  excellent  man  in  tears  on  some  private  dis- 
course of  crosses  that  had  befallen  his  illustrious  family, 
particularly  the  unhappiness  of  his  grandson  Philip  turning 
Dominican  Friar." 

Finally  the  boy  finished  what  remained  of  his  noviciate  in 
the  company  of  the  Oratorians  in  Rome,  and  thenceafter  was 
no  longer  interfered  with.  At  once  then  he  set  to  work  on  his 
ideal  of  establishing  the  English  Province  in  its  full  organiza- 
tion. As  a  novice  he  pleaded  the  cause  on  which  his  heart 
was  set  before  a  General  Chapter  of  his  Order,  asking  that 
all  the  English  friars  scattered  abroad  in  the  various  priories, 
to  which  the  chance  of  exile  led  them,  might  be  gathered  to- 
gether into  one  convent,  whence  surely  could  be  fed  the 
English  mission.  At  Rennes  he  laboured  for  some  time  from 
1650  to  1652,  when  he  was  ordained  priest  at  the  age  of 
twenty-three.  From  Rennes  he  journeyed  through  Paris  to 
Brussels  searching  out  a  convent  and  studying  the  traditions 
of  the  Order  as  he  found  them  alive  in  the  provinces  through 
which  he  passed.  He  has  left  on  record  his  dislike  for  what 
seemed  to  him  the  excessive  devotion  of  the  French  to  minute 
points  of  regulation,  finding  among  the  Flemish  more  of  that 
width  and  elasticity  of  spirit  which  he  most  desired  to  foster 
among  his  own  people.  As  part  of  the  same  experience, 
many  years  later  in  Rome  he  forcibly  declared  in  the  English 
College  against  the  education  there  in  vogue,  for  the  young 
ecclesiastics  came  over  the  seas  as  boys,  forgetting  quickly 
in  a  foreign  land  their  native  language,  and  becoming  versed 
in  many  knowledges  and  sciences  save  such  as  they  most 
needed    for    the    conversion    of    their    countrymen.      Their 


pi   # 

SHI  S ■:■#$£ 
i  W 
_J_       i  o  Par 


(To  face  p.  180 


Ube  IReorganisation  181 

sermons,  he  asserted,  were  but  the  faulty  translation  of 
Spanish  and  French  and  Portuguese,  done  badly  into  their 
own  tongaie.  Some  such  fear  as  this  made  Father  Thomas 
Howard  (as  his  name  was  in  religion)  careful  in  his  choice 
of  place  and  spirit  for  his  convent.  Then  he  journeyed  to 
England  to  inspect  the  field  of  labour  which  was  in  his 
ambitions  to  engross  all  his  life,  and  to  the  more  careful 
spiritual  harvestry  of  which  his  plans  were  now  being 
directed. 

But  a  letter  written  in  this  earlier  time,  though  not  of  im- 
portance, is  of  interest.     He  describes  going  to  Antwerp  in 

1656,  and  watching  a  French  engineer  enter  a  strange  sub- 
mersible boat  which  sank,  and  so  hidden  from  sight  beneath 
the  sea  could  pass  for  no  short  distance.  He  even  accom- 
panied his  letter  to  the  Master-General  With  a  sketch  of  this 
submarine  at  which  he  notes  the  English  exiles  stand  "  gaping 
on  the  shore  with  open  mouths."  Unfortunately  the  sketch 
has  perished. 

Once  in  England  all  his  energies  were  devoted  to  the 
business  he  had  most  at  heart.  He  visited  the  Vicar-General 
in  London  in  1656,  and  conferred  with  him  and  the  other 
English  missionaries  as  to  what  was  to  be  done.  They 
eagerly  took  up  his  project  of  a  house  in  Flanders  solely  for 
the  English  Province,  and  without  jealousy  or  any  suspicious 
prophecy  of  failure,  backed  his  enterprise  with  all  the  means 
in  their  power.  Fr.  William  Fowler  gave  ^200,  hoping 
himself  to  end  there  his  days,  but  in  the  end  death  prevented 
him.  The  others  agreed  to  collect  money  and  subjects  to 
help  on  the  great  design.  There  is  something  almost  pathetic 
in  this  kind  welcome  extended  by  these  old  men  to  their 
young  colleague  whose  age  was  only  twenty-six.  They  had 
borne  the  heat  and  burden  of  the  day,  and  lived  just  long 
enough  to  see  a  younger  generation  reap  the  great  reward. 

But  of  course  Fr.  Thomas  laboured  himself  to  raise  the 
funds  necessary  for  the  enterprise.  From  his  own  patrimony 
principally,  but  also  from  friends,  the  considerable  sums  re- 
quired for  the  buying  or  building  of  a  convent  were  finally 
secured,  so  that  in  1657  he  returned  to  Flanders.  During  his 
absence  several  Flemish  Dominicans  had  inspected  and  over- 
seen a  number  of  possible  places  for  him,  and  their  kindness 
allowed  him  almost  immediately  to  settle  on  Bornhem  in  East 
Flanders,  midway  between  Antwerp  and  Aalst.  Difficulties — 
legal,  political,  personal — were  eventually  overcome,  and  the 
convent  accepted  for  the  English  Province  on  15  December 

1657.  Just  later  Father  Thomas  Howard  was  instituted  by 
letters  patent  its  first  Prior.  Thus  after  the  lapse  of  almost 
one  hundred  years,  from  the  suppression  of  Smithfield  Priory 
on  12  July  1559  to  the  erection  of  Bornhem  Convent  into  a 
Priory  on  17  April  1658,  once  more  English  Dominicans  were 


1 82  Qhc  Bngltsb  Dominicans 

gathered  together  in  community  life  under  a  superior  of  their 
own  nation,  and  at  once  other  friars  began  to  arrive  to  people 
the  new  cloisters.  Several  young  men  had  come  over  from 
England,  sent  by  one  or  other  of  the  fathers  there  on  the 
mission  ;  these  were  left  at  Brussels,  but  others  were  called  out 
from  their  foreign  convents :  from  Louvain  came  Fr.  William 
Collins,  from  Brussels  Fr.  James  Lovel,  from  Bohemia  Fr. 
Thomas  Fidden,  from  Toulon  Fr.  Thomas  Molineux,  from 
Brittany  Fr.  Vincent  Torre.  Soon  every  cell  in  the  priory 
was  filled,  and  the  accustomed  round  of  conventual  life 
properly  lived.  Still,  several  other  English  Dominicans 
abroad,  for  one  reason  or  other,  preferred  to  stay  on  in  the 
convents  they  had  already  entered.  Of  these  the  most  cele- 
brated was  George  Goring,  Charles  I's  dashing  cavalry  leader 
and  most  profligate  wit.  After  the  ruin  of  the  King's  cause 
and  the  death'of  his  wife,  he  joined  the  Spanish  army,  where 
his  military  success  was  of  the  same  unsteady  and  uncertain 
character  as  it  had  been  in  England.  Eventually,  however, 
he  threw  over  his  worldly  and  rather  notorious  life  and 
entered  among  the  Dominicans  of  Spain,  dying  there  just 
about  the  very  time  when  Bornhem  Convent  was  being 
established. 

But  Fr.  Thomas  Howard  was  finding  work  even  outside 
his  convent,  since  the  Court  of  Charles  II  was  now  moved 
to  Brussels,  where  the  King  had  frequent  counsel  with  him. 
Indeed,  the  good  friar  was  sent  into  England  in  May  1659  to 
raise  troops  and  generally  engineer  a  rising  in  favour  of  the 
Stuart  cause  against  the  young  Protector,  Richard  Cromwell. 
But  his  colleague  in  the  revolt,  an  English  Carthusian,  re- 
vealed the  plot  which  ended  in  the  abrupt  suppression  of  the 
Cheshire  revolt,  and  the  hasty  departure  of  Fr.  Thomas  from 
England  in  the  dress  of  a  Polish  retainer,  amongst  the  curious 
entourage  of  the  Polish  Ambassador. 

On  his  return  Fr.  Howard  set  to  work  at  once  on  two 
other  projects  for  the  complete  and  abiding  establishment  of 
the  English  Province,  a  school  for  boys  and  a  convent  of 
Dominican  nuns.  It  is  really  interesting  to  notice  how  very 
thoroughly  this  young  prior  arranged  the  basis  of  his 
Dominican  campaign.  Spiritually  and  temporally  it  was  to  be 
buttressed  up.  The  boys  in  the  school  were  to  form  a  recruit- 
ing ground  for  the  Order,  such  as  the  Jesuits,  Benedictines, 
and  secular  clergy  had  already  secured  abroad,  the  nuns  to 
defend  with  their  arm  of  prayer  their  brethren  out  in  the 
battlefield.  By  1660  the  college  was  opened  with  six  boys, 
one  of  them  being  Esme  Howard,  the  prior's  youngest 
brother.  The  steady  increase  of  pupils  enforced  additions 
to  the  buildings,  both  in  1660  and  in  1662;  after  which  date 
Fr.  Thomas  Howard  transferred  himself  to  England  and  the 
Royal  Court,  being  appointed  almost  immediately  after  the 


Ube  IReorQanisation  183 

marriage  to    the   post  of  confessor  to   Queen   Catherine   of 
Braganza.   In  the  meanwhile  Fr.  Vincent  Torre  was  acting-  as 
superior,  and  generally  disturbing  the  whole  community  by 
his  individual  ideas  rigorously  enforced.    He  suppressed  the 
college,  which  he  considered  detrimental  to  the  religious  calm 
of  the  cloister,  though  the  fathers  were  furious  at  this  act, 
and  in  their  Chronicle  that  remains,  express  with  exceeding 
force  their  condemnation  of  his  policy.     As  soon  as  he  could 
be  got  out  of  office,  the  college  was  restarted  and  gradually 
reorganized,    though  coming  later  upon  evil  times.    But  in 
1703  the  school  took  on  a  new  lease  of  life.    Nearly  all  the 
Catholic  families  of  England  came  to  be  represented  among 
the  list  of  scholars,  and  names  and  addresses  of  the  guardians 
from  "my  Lord  of  Portland"  and  "Sir  Henry  Tichborne  of 
Rue  de  Krouge,   Rheims  "  to   "  Capt.    Howell  of  49  Great 
Hermitage  Street,  Wapping  "  and  "Mr.   Nowlam  of  Keate 
Street    near   Whitechapel,"    illustrate   the  widespread    area 
whence  the  boys  came,  though  as  a  matter  of  fact  almost  all 
were  from  London,  or  at  least  noted  with  a  London  address. 
Without  this  school  it  is  difficult  to   say  how  the  Province 
could  have  at  all  survived.    The  boys  wore  a  quaint  uniform, 
cassock,  black  girdle,  leather  knee-breeches,  long  stockings, 
buckled  stock  and  bands,   shoes  with  buckles,    and   a  hat. 
Their  accomplishments  were  varied,  including  dead  languages 
and  dancing,  "  french,  fencing,  and  musick."    Hence  fiddles 
and  flutes  figure  in  the  bills,  the  dulcet  tones  of  which  must 
have  been  helped   out  by  the  croaking  of  a    raven,  and  the 
combined  concerts  of  "two  dogs  and  a  monkey,"  these  last 
having  been  contributed  by  three  Master  Hunts  and  Master 
Charles  Neale.    The  raven  was  a  mysterious  apparition,  for 
from    1 72 1   back  to   1666  it  had   been  well  known  to  every 
generation   of  boy   at    Bornhem.    In    1771    the   college   was 
rebuilt  so  as  to  accommodate  150  students.    Lord  Stourton, 
Lord  Dormer,  the  Earl  of  Fingall,  and  Sir  Henry  Eglefield, 
together  with  Mr.   John  Wade,  a  merchant  of  Leeds,  were 
the  chief  benefactors.1 

The  suppression  of  the  Jesuits  was  quickly  followed  in 
Flanders  by  an  edict  of  the  Austrian  Privy  Council,  whereby 
the  English  Dominicans  were  put  in  charge  of  Bruges  College 
(now  Stonyhurst).  The  head  master  of  Bornhem  refused,  but 
was  overruled  by  an  Imperial  Edict,  dated  8  October  1773. 
But  the  boys  were  as  resolved  as  the  Dominicans  to  prevent 
its  being  carried  into  effect,  and  indulged  in  wild  riots,  dash- 
ing to  pieces  tables,  desks,  chairs,  and  windows — indeed, 
thoroughly  enjoying  themselves  in  being  able  to  create  con- 
fusion in  the  interests  of  the  school.  The  Austrian  Govern- 
ment introduced  into  the  college  soldiers  and  some  religious 

1  Merry  England,  Feb.,  1889,  p.  30;  MSS.  in  archives  at  S.  Dominic's 
Priorv,  London. 


1 84  XTbe  BiiQlisb  Dominicans 

brothers  who  had  the  charge  of  madhouses,  and  endeavoured 
by  force  to  compel  the  boys  to  submit.  Whereupon  the 
Dominicans,  refusing  to  countenance  such  an  insult  to  the 
boys,  withdrew.  The  boys  fled.  The  college  was  closed. 
This  interlude,  while  it  disturbed  the  teaching  staff  at 
Bornhem,  in  no  wise  interfered  with  the  success  of  the  school 
there.  One  of  the  most  triumphant  head  masters  that  Bornhem 
ever  had  was  Fr.  Lewis  Brittain,  a  convert.  For  eighteen 
years  he  guided  it  through  many  difficulties,  being  a  teacher 
of  no  mean  skill.  His  Rudiments  of English  Grammar,  printed 
by  J.  L.  Urban  in  1778,  went  into  a  second  edition  in  1790, 
and  received  this  commendation  from  John  Walker,  the  lexi- 
cographer: "Dear  Sir,  You  sent  me  your  'Grammar'  in 
manuscript  to  peruse,  which  I  did  with  great  pleasure.  It  was 
printed  some  time  afterwards,  when  I  again  perused  it  with 
increased  pleasure;  and  having"  lately  an  intention  to  write  a 
grammar  myself  I  again  consulted  it  with  much  advantage. 
...  I  propose  mentioning  your  '  Grammar  '  in  that  I  intend 
to  publish."1 

The  French  Revolution  ended  the  career  of  the  school  by 
making  it  impossible  as  a  residence  for  English  boys.  Flemish 
scholars,  however,  were  still  admitted,  and  the  numbers 
maintained,  but  the  fathers  speedily  lost  interest,  and  in 
1794  fled  over  the  sea  to  England.  Here  at  Carshalton  the 
school  revived,  and  its  story  there  will  be  shortly  told  in  the 
last  chapter. 

The  other  project  which  Fr.  Thomas  Howard  had  no  less 
in  view  as  an  integral  part  of  the  Province,  was  a  Convent  of 
Nuns  of  the  Second  Order,  who  are  by  their  profession  given 
over  to  the  work  of  contemplation.'  In  1660  leave  for  the 
establishment  of  such  a  convent  was  obtained  from  the 
Master-General.  Antonia  Howard,  the  Prior's  cousin,  was 
sent  to  another  Dominican  convent  near  by  to  learn  the  life 
and  pass  her  noviciate,  "she  being,"  says  the  Chronicles  of 
the  English  nuns,  "  the  first  English  that  had  to  our  know- 
ledge taken  the  habit  of  our  Holy  Father  S.  Dominic  since 
the  unhappy  fall  of  religion  in  England."  From  this  convent 
three  Flemish  nuns,  to  help  in  the  foundation,  accompanied 
Antonia  Howard  (Sister  Catherine  was  her  name  in  religion) 
and  another  novice,  Elizabeth  Boyle,  a  convert,  to  Vilvorde, 
and  there  in  a  private  house  the  five  set  up  a  convent.  Three 
months  later  the  Howard  girl  died,  professed  on  her  death- 
bed. During  a  trance  that  preceded  her  departure  by  only  a 
few  hours  she  declared  herself  to  behold  God's  Mother,  offer- 
ing to  her  a  rosary  and  a  crown  ;  "  and  presently  after  with 
a  pleasant  smiling  countenance  she  left  this  wretched  life  (as 
we  have  great  reason  to  hope)  to  pass  into  eternal  felicity." 

1  MS.  letter,  S.  Dominic's  Priory,  London. 

2  Life  of  Philip  Thomas  Howard,  p.   119. 


Qftc  IReoroamsation  185 

In  1669  the  nuns  moved  to  a  castle-like  house  in  Brussels, 
which  went  by  the  name  of  Spellekens,  as  it  had  once  been  a 
pin  factory.  By  this  time  six  English  choir  sisters  and  a 
Flemish  lay-sister  made  up  the  community.  But  as  years 
passed  the  numbers  gradually  increased  and  remained  steadily 
assured,  though  never  constituting  a  large  convent.  When 
the  Emperor  Joseph  II  suppressed  all  convents  not  engaged 
on  active  work,  the  sisters  were  obliged  to  open  a  school  in 
order  to  be  allowed  to  continue  undisturbed,  till  the  French 
Revolution  broke  up  the  convent  as  it  had  broken  up  the 
boys'  school.  Soldiers  ransacked  the  establishment,  pillaged 
the  chapel  after  carefully  removing  the  Blessed  Sacrament, 
and  made  off  with  all  the  food  they  could  find.  Even  the 
nuns'  veils  and  mantles  were  removed  to  adorn  the  tattered 
uniforms  of  the  ragged  soldiers  of  the  Republic.  For  a  while 
it  was  uncertain  whether  France  or  Austria  would  triumph  in 
Flanders,  and  the  nuns  lingered  at  Brussels  to  await  the 
turn  of  fortune.  But  by  June  1794  there  was  no  longer  any 
doubt.  From  Bruges  and  the  neighbourhood  the  English 
communities  were  in  flight;  at  last  the  sisters  left  Brussels 
and  fled  to  Bornhem.  From  here,  after  a  short  respite,  they 
set  out  for  England.  In  two  carts  the  more  aged  and  sick  of 
the  religious  had  been  sent  forward,  the  rest  following-  on 
foot.  The  ship  set  sail  from  Rotterdam  on  9  July,  and  reached 
the  Thames  in  safety  on  16  July;  the  Provincial  met  them 
and  led  them  to  a  house  in  Seymour  Street,  Portman  Square, 
where  lodgings  were  secured  them  at  five  guineas  a  week. 
Thence  through  the  kindness  of  the  two  daughters  of  John 
Berkely  of  Hindlip  (later  Mrs.  John  Canning  and  Lady  South- 
well) the  nuns  moved  to  Hartpury  Court,  near  Gloucester,  on 
28  August  1794,  where  a  school  was  begun  but  abandoned  in 
order  that  the  sisters  might  be  able  to  adopt  the  strict  con- 
templative life  required  of  the  Second  Order  of  Dominicans. 
In  September  1839  they  moved  to  Atherstone,  in  June  1858 
to  Hurst  Green,  near  Stonyhurst  College  by  the  edge  of  the 
boys'  cricket  field,  and  in  1866  to  Carisbrooke  through  the 
munificence  of  the  Countess  of  Clare,  who  among  the  sisters 
spent  her  last  days. 

The  following  "  Doleful  memorandum  written  by  Sister 
Ann  Busby,  Prioresse  1709,"  l  from  the  original  manuscript  in 
the  archives  of  the  Dominican  Convent  of  Our  Lady  of 
Reparation  and  S.  Dominic,  Carisbrooke,  Isle  of  Wight, 
tells  its  own  tale : 

"Upon  Tuesday  in  holy  weeke,  it  being  the  seventh  of 
Aprill  1705,  Was  stollen  out  of  the  Tabernacle  of  the  English 
Dominican  Nuns  in  Bruxells  the  Remonstrance  with  the  Bd. 
Sacrament  in  it.     Which  was  a  very  great  grief  and  affliction 

1  MS.  in  archives,  S.  Dominic's  Priory,  Carisbrooke,  Isle  of  Wig-ht. 


186  xrbe  Bnglisb  Dominicans 

to  our  Community,  we  had  continuall  prayers  six  weekes  to- 
gether, Singing  for  this  intent  every  day  the  great  Littanis, 
and  littanis  of  our  Bd.  Lady.  Prayers  to  St.  Antony  of  Padua, 
&c.  The  Bishop  commanded  for  this  intent  three  Prayer  days 
all  o're  the  Towne,  with  the  Exposition  of  the  Bd.  Sacrament; 
and  in  our  Church  it  was  Exposed  six  days;  and  our  Church 
all  this  time  Mourn'd  in  Purple  from  Easter  to  Ascention. 
We  fasted  with  bread  and  water  two  fridays,  Everyone  from 
the  Eldest  to  the  youngest,  sitting  the  whole  time  of  Table 
upon  the  ground,  that  God  would  be  pleased  to  manifest  to 
us  the  Sacraledgous  Thiefe,  and  the  Bd.  Sacrament  might  be 
restored  to  us  againe.  And  upon  a  Saterday  night,  the  16  of 
May  1705,  Mr.  John  Jacobs,  a  Mason-Master  and  Deacon  of 
the  Trade  (and  our  near  neighbour) — Was  ceased  upon  and 
put  in  prison  in  Steenport,  upon  the  suspition  of  the  fact,  and 
after  he  had  bin  in  prison  three  days,  he  Confest  twas  he 
had  stollen  the  Remonstrance;  which  he  might  doe  easier 
than  another,  for  he  served  our  Mass  when  ever  he  would, 
and  we  confided  in  him  like  a  Domestick.  his  father  and  him- 
selfe  had  bin  our  Massons  six  and  thirtie  years ;  and  he  was 
that  very  day  he  Stole  it,  in  actuall  worke  for  us. 

"After  he  had  confest  his  sacriledge  to  the  Judges  and 
Majestrats  he  told  them  he  had  broke  and  melted  most  of  the 
Silver,  and  the  Gold  Jewells  about  the  Remonstrance,  (as 
proved  true).  Some  he  had  sold  to  severall  goldsmith,  which 
brought  them  to  great  trouble  and  Law  suits ;  the  remainder 
of  what  was  left  Jacobs  had  buried  under  ground  in  his 
Garden,  that  non  could  find  them  but  himselfe ;  so  that  the 
Amptman,  and  Judges  brought  him  out  of  Prison  in  the  night, 
to  discover  where  he  had  buried  them.  And  there  in  his 
Garden  he  opend  three  or  four  places,  where  the  remainder  of 
the  Jewells  and  the  foot  of  the  Remonstrance  was;  and  he 
had  planted  Trees,  and  other  things  upon  the  places  wher  he 
had  buried  them,  so  that  no  body  but  himselfe  could  ever  a 
found  them  out.  But  he  would  not  Confesse  what  he  had  don 
with  the  Bd.  Sacrament,  tho  he  was  rackt  to  tell  it.  Some 
times  he  sayde  he  had  put  it  in  one  place,  some  times  in  an 
other;  but  never  told  the  truth. 

"The  things  in  the  Garden  being  found  out,  the  next  day 
there  came  such  a  multitude  of  people  to  view  and  see  the 
places  in  the  Prisoner's  garden,  where  he  had  buried  the  foot 
of  the  Remonstrance,  and  some  part  of  the  Jewells  belonging 
to  it,  that  the  streets  were  covered  with  men,  woemen,  and 
children  from  four  a  clocke  in  the  Morning  till  nine  at  night, — 
some  rushing  into  the  garden,  others  looking  through  the 
•Hedges  on  all  sides,  that  a  guard  of  Soldjers  that  was  put 
there  to  keep  the  garden  could  not  keep  them  off,  so  great 
was  their  curiosity ;  and  many  of  them  gave  mony  to  the 
Soldiers  to  let  them  into  the  gardin,  that  they  might  the  better 


Ubc  IRcorGaniiation  187 

sattisfie  their  curiosity,  this  concourse  of  people  lasted  about 
ten  days,  till  the  Criminall  was  put  to  death. 

"  After  all  his  Process  was  ended,  he  received  his  sentence 
of  death  upon  the  26  of  May  1705  ;  and  the  same  day  he  wrote 
a  letter  to  our  Community  to  beg"  pardon  for  this  great  crime, 
and  for  all  he  had  don  against  us;  and  another  to  our  Con- 
fessor, who  was  the  Very  Rd.  Father  Ambroise  Grymes,  then 
Provinciall  of  England,  whom  we  had  the  honour  to  have  for 
Confessor.  This  letter  of  the  Prisoner  was  likewise  to  beg  his 
Rce.  pardon ;  and  were  both  writ  in  his  owne  hand. 

"On  the  27  of  May,  about  ten  a  clocke,  John  Jacobs  the 
Prisoner  was  brought  in  a  cart,  bare-headed,  there  being  a 
Jesuit  with  him ;  and  thus  with  a  great  Guard  of  Soldiers  on 
Horsback  all  armd:  some  riding  before  the  cart,  others  be- 
hind, till  he  was  brought  before  our  Church  dore,  and  there 
tied  to  a  post,  put  in  the  ground  for  that  purpose,  being  stript 
to  the  wast,  was  whipt  with  three  rods.  Then  they  put  him 
on  a  Pitcht  coate,  and  so  he  returnd  in  the  same  cart  to  the 
Market-place,  where  a  scaffold  being  made  for  him,  he  there 
againe  contest,  and  at  each  corner  of  it  demanded  pardon  of 
the  whole  assembly  for  all  the  scandall  he  had  given,  and  for 
his  sacraledgous  theft ;  and  said  these  words : 

"  '  Looke  or  search,  no  more,  for  the  Holy  Host  which  I 
stole,  for  I  tooke  it  in  my  sinfull  mouth,  for  which  I  am  sorry.' 

"These  his  last  words  were  believ'd;  being  seconded  by 
his  Confessor,  the  Jesuit,  who  helpt  him  to  die. 

"  Then  his  right  hand  was  cut  off,  and  he  being  strangled, 
was  then  burnt ;  and  his  burnt  body  carried  to  a  place  out  of 
Towne  cald  the  Three  Towers,  there  exposed  to  the  view  of 
all  the  World. 

"As  soon  as  we  could,  we  made  a  new  Remonstrance, 
which  weighs  134  ounces  at  55^  Stivers  the  ounce 

"  Makes  in  all     .         .         .         .         .          .          .  373-2 

"  For  the  workmanship,  at  30  Sti.  the  ounce:     .  201-14 

"  For  the  2  Cristals    ......  001-1 

"for  the  graving  &  gilding  the  Exce  Panis  & 

halfe  Moon.          ......  004-10 

"  for  enchasing  severall  stons     ....  30-18 


"  totall  same       ....     61 1-3 


"When  the  Remonstrance  was  made,  it  was  carried  to 
Sainte  Gudule  to  have  the  Bd.  Sacrament  put  into  it,  it  being 
the  great  church  of  our  Parish  ;  and  there  all  the  Orders  met 
together;  where  the  Cannons  of  Ste.  Gudule,  and  all  the 
Orders  came  in  Procession  to  accompany  the  Bd.  Sacrament 
to  our  church  in  the  new  Remonstrance  ;  where  the  Te  Deum 


1 88  zhc  Bnglisfo  Dominicans 

was  sung  by  our  Religious,  our  Church  Bell  ringing  the 
whole  time.  Tantum  Ergo  was  sung  by  the  Cannons  accom- 
panied with  Musick  wich  fild  our  hearts  with  joy,  and  our 
eyes  with  tears.  We  had  Drums  and  Trumpets  &  Commers, 
(which  resound  as  loud  as  Cannons)  to  wellcome  our  great 
God  and  King.  Never  any  such  Procession  had  bin  seen  in 
our  Street  before,  which  was  hung  with  Tapestrie  and  devout 
Picturs  from  the  Street  to  our  Church  Dore.  And  our  Church 
was  Richly  adorn'd  and  severall  new  things  made  for  the 
Alter  express  for  this  Solemnity. 

"The  Pope  granted  a  Plennary  Indulgence  on  Easter 
Monday  to  all  the  faithfull  that  shall  visit  our  Church  on  that 
day;  where  the  Bd.  Sacrament  will  be  exposed  from  morning 
to  Evening  in  memory  of  this  sad  and  dolefull  action. 

"And  these  Indulgences  are  to  be  renewed  every  seven 
years.  The  first  year  of  the  Indulgence  was  dated  the  25th  of 
June  1706.    All  praise  be  to  God  for  Ever. 

"After  some  years,  the  half-moon,  where  the  Bd.  Sacra- 
ment stands,  in  our  new  Remonstrance,  was  changed  into 
betten  Gold;  and  all  the  Juells  about  it  are  true  stones;  so 
that  the  half-moon  is  now  of  considerable  vallue. 

"  All  praise  be  to  God." 

But  the  organization  of  these  two  establishments  did  not 
prevent  Fr.  Howard  from  devoting  himself,  as  steadily  as 
before,  to  the  English  Mission.  In  1661  Father  Thomas  Catch- 
may,  with  that  unselfishness  which  marked  the  whole  attitude 
of  the  older  fathers  towards  the  young  Prior  of  Bornhem, 
resigned  the  Vicar-Provincialate,  soliciting  the  General  to 
nominate  Thomas  Howard  in  his  place.1  The  letters  patent 
arrived,  dated  24  July,  and  straightway  the  new  Vicar  left  for 
England.  Here  his  work  lay  mostly  near  the  Court,  where  his 
uncle  was  Lord  Almoner  to  the  Queen,  and  he  the  Queen's 
chaplain  with  lodging  at  Whitehall.  Four  years  later  he  suc- 
ceeded to  the  post  of  High-Almoner,  where  his  energy  for  the 
Faith  began  to  display  itself  in  a  way  distasteful  to  the 
Protestants.  He  reconciled  to  the  Church  a  Canon  of  Windsor, 
he  published  papal  bulls  of  indulgences  to  be  gained  by  the 
devotion  of  the  Rosary,  and  he  took  no  small  part  in  persuading 
Charles  II  to  publish  the  Declaration  of  Toleration.  All  this 
roused  such  a  fierce  storm  of  hostility  that  at  the  royal  desire 
he  withdrew  to  Flanders,  carrying  with  him  money  from  the 
King  and  Queen  for  the  exiled  Catholics  in  Belgium. 

Meanwhile  he  found  that  English  novices  had  come  into 
Bornhem  in  large  numbers.  So  full  was  the  convent  with 
religious  that  an  attempt  was  made  to  establish  another  priory 
at    Dieppe.      When    that    failed   the    Dominican    Church    at 

1  Life  of  Philip  Thomas  Howard,  p.  124. 


Qftc  1Reoraani3ation  189 

Tangiers,  which  had  passed  into  an  English  possession  as 
part  of  the  dowry  of  Catherine  of  Braganza,  was  given  to  the 
English  friars,  but  was  subsequently  relinquished  to  the  Irish 
Province.  Then  Antwerp  was  thought  of  and  failed.  Even- 
tually, however,  the  convent  and  church  of  SS.  John  and  Paul 
in  Rome,  and,  on  their  surrender,  a  house  of  studies  at  Louvain, 
became  the  only  other  places  where  regular  religious  life  was 
maintained  by  the  English  Province. 

But  in  the  meantime  a  very  great  event  had  taken  place, 
for  Father  Howard  was  created  Cardinal  Priest  of  S.  Cecilia 
in  Trastevere  in  1675.  This  naturally  gave  him  far  more 
power  and  opportunity  for  pushing  forward  his  English  pro- 
jects. On  the  death  of  Cardinal  Francesco  Barbarini,  Cardinal 
Howard  became  protector  of  England;  as  such  he  helped 
extensively  in  the  building  of  the  English  College  in  Rome, 
and  his  own  State  apartments  formed  part  of  the  College.  In 
April  1685,  through  his  representations,  the  title  of  Provincial, 
which  had  been  borne  by  a  member  of  the  council  of  the 
Master-General,  and  had  become  a  merely  titular  appellation, 
was  now  restored,  together  with  the  office,  to  the  English 
fathers,  though  owing  to  the  difficulties  that  attended  Catholic 
life  in  England,  it  was  not  possible  to  arrange  for  an  election 
to  the  Provincialate  as  the  democratic  constitutions  of  the 
Order  presume.  The  General  Chapter  held  in  May  1694  in 
Rome,  ordained  that  those  English  fathers,  whose  labours 
made  them  deserving  of  honour,  might  be  nominated  priors 
of  the  ancient  ruined  priories  of  England,  and  thereby  with 
such  show  of  representative  government  as  the  times  allowed 
proceed  to  elect  a  Provincial.1  A  chapter  of  this  description 
met  in  1712,  but  the  right  of  nomination  to  the  Provincialate 
was  still  left  to  the  Master-General  till  17 18,  when  three  names 
were  submitted  for  his  determining  choice.  However,  in  1730, 
regular  Provincial  Chapters  began  to  be  held  under  Father 
Thomas  Worthington,  first  at  Mr.  Beasley's,  the  lodgings  of 
Father  Burgis,  in  London.2  At  his  house,  therefore,  in  the 
April  of  that  year,  in  Panton  Street,  near  Leicester  Fields, 
and  in  1734  at  Mr.  Barton's  in  Holborn,  the  capitular  fathers 
from  all  over  England,  chiefly,  that  is,  from  the  north,  east, 
and  south-west,  in  the  snuff-coloured  and  drab  garments 
that  the  clergy  then  affected,  assembled  as  representatives  of 
the  Province,  past,  present,  to  come.  Thence  onwards  till  our 
time,  at  the  canonical  period  of  four  years,  they  have  been 
solemnly  held  with  unfailing  regularity,  except  in  1746,  when 
the  last  determined  effort  of  the  previous  year  to  upset  the 
Hanoverian  Succession,  and  its  complete  failure  to  re-establish 
the  Stuarts  on  the  throne,  made  the  meetings  of  reputed 
Jacobites  unwise.     This  necessitated  extreme  caution  on  the 

'  Acta  Cap.  Gen.,  vol.  viii,  pp.  304-305. 

2  Acta  Capitidorum  Provinciali 11m,  privately  printed,  London,  1918. 


i go  Qhc  JEwQlteb  Dominicans 

part  of  the  Friar  Preachers,  who  were  certainly,  on  the  whole, 
devoted  to  the  cause  of  the  Pretenders. 

Long-  before  this  date,  Cardinal  Howard,  in  his  will  still 
testifying-  his  devotion  to  the  Province  and  the  nuns,  had  died 
in  Rome  17  June  1694,  having  lived  out  of  his  sixty-four 
years,  forty-eight  as  a  Dominican,  forty-two  as  a  priest,  and 
twenty  as  a  Cardinal.  His  going,  though  it  sorrowed,  did'not 
affect  the  life  of  the  English  friars.  By  this  time,  through  his 
means,  the  Province  had  become  too  firmly  fixed  to  be  thus 
easily  disturbed.  Several  members  of  the  Province  had,  indeed, 
been  caught  in  the  meshes  of  persecution,  but  to  their  distress 
none  suffered  the  violent  death  of  martyrdom.  Father  Middle- 
ton  had  been  in  prison  in  1628,  and  remained  in  the  Clink  till 
1635;  he  was  again  in  confinement  in  1641,  when  Fra  Theo- 
doro  della  Pieta  wrote  to  the  General  from  London  on 
7  August ;  and  had  only  a  short  respite  between  1643  and 
1 65 1,  when  his  name  once  more  occurs  on  the  list  of  the  New- 
gate criminals.1  Father  Martin  Russell,  the  first  follower  of 
Cardinal  Howard,  while  working  at  Little  Malvern,  his  family 
seat,  was  arrested  for  his  supposed  complicity  in  the  Titus 
Oates  plot,  when  the  subjoined  amusing  interview  between 
him  and  Bishop  Croft  of  Hereford,  an  apostate  Catholic,  took 
place.  Father  Russell,  as  a  young  boy  of  nineteen,  had  fought 
for  Charles  II  at  Worcester.  The  Bishop  began  by  asking 
how  he  was  bred. 

Fr.  Russell.  When  a  little  one,  I  have  heard  people  say,  I 
was  reared  like  other  children  with  milk  and  pap ;  when  I 
grew  up  I  remember  a  butterum  and  a  piece  of  cheese 
served. 

Bishop  Croft.  This  is  not  to  our  purpose  :  I  ask  your 
education. 

Fr.  Russell.  When  I  was  grown  up  I  served  my  King  and 
fought  for  him  in  Worcester  battle  where  you  durst  not  show 
your  face. 

Bishop  Croft.  You  were  educate  beyond  seas,  were  you 
not? 

Fr.  Russell.  I  hope  my  Lord,  that  is  no  crime;  your  Lord- 
ship was  so  too. 

Bishop  Croft.   What  did  you  study  there? 

Fr.  Russell.  How  to  get  back  again.  I  served  the  King  at 
Tangiers,  and  suffered  there  much  for  his  sake. 

Bishop  Croft.   Come,  come,  tell  the  truth. 

Fr.  Russell.  That  I  will,  and  the  naked  truth. 

The  local  gentry  purposely  volunteered  to  serve  on  the 
jury  and  threw  out  the  accusation.2 

1   Obituary  Notices,  p.  2.  -  MS.,  S.  Dominic's  Priory,  London. 


TTbe  IReorgamsation  191 

Father  Albert  Anderson1  was  another  of  much  influence  in 
London  among-  Catholics,  and  was  a  private  and  confidential 
friend  to  Charles  II.  His  main  literary  productions  were 
pamphlets  against  the  power  of  the  Pope  over  temporal 
princes.  But  his  rather  liberal  opinions  on  this  and  on  the 
matter  of  the  oath  of  allegiance  brought  down  on  him  the 
hostility  of  other  and  stricter  Catholics,  though  he,  too,  was 
put  in  Newgate  during  the  Titus  Oates  panic.  His  tempestu- 
ous replies  at  his  trial  provoked  against  him  the  judge  and 
jury,  and  he  was  condemned  to  death  and  quartering.  This 
judgement  was  solemnly  passed  on  him  in  court,  though  the 
execution  of  it  was  considerably  delayed,  until  the  good 
friar  petitioned  Charles  II  for  his  speedy  martyrdom  ;  but 
Charles  commuted  his  death  penalty  to  transportation  for 
life.  Anderson,  however,  returned  to  London  a  few  years 
later,  where  he  laboured  assiduously  till  his  death  in  17 10. 

Another  Dominican,  Father  Peter  Atwood,2  had  actually 
begun  his  journey  to  Tyburn,  having  just  got  on  to  the  sledge 
so  as  to  be  drawn  to  execution,  when  a  reprieve  arrived  from 
Charles,  and  he  was  set  at  liberty.  But  he  wept  bitterly  his 
loss.  One  who  knew  him  has  left  on  record  the  persistent 
regrets  and  tears  that  for  all  the  rest  of  his  days  marked  his 
disappointment:  "Which  I  myself  have  heard  him  do  with 
much  vehemence  and  concern." 

The  Court  of  Queen  Catherine  was  the  centre  of  a  good 
deal  of  English  Catholic  life,  and  the  Dominicans  had  their 
share  also  in  her  patronage.  Father  Thomas  Howard  had 
secured  Father  Ambrose  Grymes  3  (who,  but  for  his  faith  had 
been  Sir  Richard  Grymes  of  Netherby),  a  chaplaincy  at 
Somerset  House  as  Preacher  in  Ordinary  to  the  Dowager 
Queen.  There  he  remained  till  the  break  up  of  the  establish- 
ment in  1692.  Father  Raymund  Greene4  was  another  who 
both  in  Windsor  and  London  lived  in  the  household  of  the 
King;  but  this  he  had  done  from  his  childhood,  being  re- 
ceived into  the  Catholic  Church  at  the  age  of  sixteen  by 
Father  Thomas  Howard.  Towards  him,  too,  Charles  II  always 
bore  an  affectionate  remembrance. 

That  this  remembrance  won  loyalty  in  distressful  times 
was  evidenced  by  the  finding  of  Father  Pius  Littleton  among 
the  Stuart  followers  in  1715.  When  at  Preston  the  Hano- 
verian troops  were  searching  out  the  fugitive  rebels,  he  put 
on  a  blue  apron  and  went  behind  an  apothecary's  counter, 
whereby  he  passed  for  the  chemist's  assistant  and  so  got  off. 
Life,  however,  was  evidently  made  difficult  for  him,  for  he 
appears  to  have  passed  over  to  Ireland.0  The  registers  of  the 
convent  speak  of  him  as  dying  in  1723,  but  note  that  this 

1   Obituary  Notices,  p.  7.  2  Ibid.,  p.  9. 

3  Ibid.  .  *  Ibid.,  p.  13. 

5  Patten,  History  of  the  late  Rebellion,  p.  132. 


ig2  Ufoe  JEiiglisb  Dominicans 

official  "  death  "  was  never  believed,  and  "  rumour  made  him 
live  another  eleven  months."  It  was  through  James  III,  as 
the  Dominican  records  always  style  him,  that  another  English 
friar  climbed  to  eminence,  for  Father  Dominic  Williams  was 
apparently  a  rather  effective  Jacobite  agent,  both  in  England 
and  abroad.1  Indeed,  as  far  as  can  be  discovered  the  whole 
English  Province  was  engaged  in  the  cause  of  both  the  old 
Pretender  and  Prince  Charlie.  Friars  and  nuns  became  the 
centre  of  much  correspondence  which  was  in  those  times 
highly  treasonable.  One  of  the  Spellekens'  sisters  was 
sought  for  in  marriage  by  the  gay  Prince,  and  Rome  was 
willing  to  dispense  her  vows,  but  the  good  nun  herself 
steadily  refused.  In  return  no  doubt  for  the  vague  compli- 
ment of  this  royal  proposal,  Sister  Rose  Howard  became  a 
great  Jacobite  centre  of  correspondence,  which  alas!  by  later 
prioresses  bent  on  tidiness  rather  than  historical  record,  has 
been  destroyed."  Father  Dominic  Williams3  was  another  of 
these  Stuart  followers,  and  through  James  III  was  nomin- 
ated Vicar-Apostolic  of  the  northern  district  on  the  death 
of  Bishop  Witham  in  1725.  Benedict  XIII,  himself  a  friar 
preacher,  personally  consecrated  the  new  prelate.  There  was 
the  usual  opposition  and  intrigue,  but  the  Pope  was  firm  in 
his  appointment.  From  Rome  by  slow  stages  the  Bishop 
moved  towards  England.  His  work  was  just  the  pastoral 
wandering  life  of  the  northern  Bishops,  and  the  record  of 
his  journeys  is  a  record  of  visitations  to  his  priests,  his  chief 
Catholic  landowners,  and  his  confirmations  in  the  towns  and 
villages  through  which  he  passed,  accompanied  by  one  of  his 
own  brethren,  or  sometimes  by  his  younger  brother,  who  was 
a  Jesuit.  With  him,  as  a  frequent  companion,  was  Father 
Thomas  Worthington,'  who  as  Provincial  did  exceedingly 
zealous  work,  and  it  was  he  who  organized  the  Provincial 
Chapters  in  1730.  A  good  deal  of  Father  Worthington's 
time  was  spent  in  the  north,  but  London,  too,  knew  him  as 
a  leading  light  among  the  Catholic  clergy.  Among  his  own 
brethren  he  was,  after  Cardinal  Howard,  the  most  effective 
superior,  for  his  interests  were  wide,  and  his  personal  char- 
acter lovable.  The  records  of  the  past  that  he  could  gather 
were  carefully  collected,  and  his  beautiful  handwriting  has 
preserved  for  us  much  that  would  otherwise  have  been  lost. 
With  Father  John  Martin,5  a  son  of  Sir  Roger  Martin  of 
Long  Melford,  he  has  left  us,  more  than  any  other,  the 
accounts  of  such  early  traditions  as  the  Province  still  treasures 
of  the  pre-Reformation  days.    Through  him  and  Father  Mar- 

'  Merry  Engla?id,  Nov.  and  Dec,  1887. 

-  Gilday,    The  English  Catholic  Refugees  on  the  Co?itinent,  1558-1790, 
vol.  i,  pp.  417-420. 

3  Merry  England,  Nov.  and  Dec,  1887. 

*  Ibid.,  Nov.  and  Dec,  1888.  *  Obituary  Notices,  p.  17. 


Zht  "(Reorganisation  193 

tin,  these  traditions  were  at  last  set  down  and  preserved  in 
the  archives  of  the  Province.  However,  Father  Martin's 
manuscripts  are  a  great  deal  more  copious  than  Father 
Worthington's,  and  being"  encumbered  with  no  official  re- 
sponsibilities he  had  more  time  to  devote  to  his  historical 
labours.  Certainly,  between  them  they  amassed  a  very  large 
amount  of  material,  out  of  which  alone  the  history  of  the 
Province  could  be  written.  It  is  this  fund  of  record  which 
Father  Raymund  Palmer  copied  out,  corrected,  and  confirmed, 
and  which  now  immensely  added  to,  forms  a  series  of  eight 
folio  volumes,  each  of  seven  hundred  pages,  written  in  a  clear 
and  beautiful  handwriting.  To  these  three  alone  is  due  the 
possibility  of  even  so  slight  a  record  as  this  volume  is. 

Another  English  friar  whom  it  is  of  interest  to  note,  though 
he  did  not  actively  fill  a  large  part  in  the  story  of  the  Province, 
was  Fr.  Thomas  Dryden,  by  right  Sir  Erasmus  Dryden.1  His 
two  elder  brothers,  sons  of  "  Glorious  John,"  the  great  poet 
Laureate  of  the  Stuarts,  died ;  Charles  being  drowned  at 
Datchet  Ferry  when  attempting  for  a  third  consecutive  time 
to  swim  across  the  Thames,  and  John  of  pleurisy  in  Rome.  To 
the  convent  of  Bornhem  Erasmus  Dryden  turned,  and  thence 
went  to  Rome,  and  finally  to  the  English  mission,  where 
London  first,  then  Canons  Ashby,  the  family  seat  of  the 
Drydens,  were  the  scenes  of  his  labours.  The  property  never 
came  to  him  on  his  uncle's  death,  for  his  Catholic  faith  was 
prejudice  to  that ;  but  he  lived  the  last  years  of  his  life  from 
1708  to  1 7 10  at  the  old  house  at  Ashby.  Consumption  settled 
on  his  lungs  and  caused  him  to  linger  on  in  weakness,  his 
mind  becoming  affected  in  the  progress  of  the  disease.  Here 
Fr.  Thomas  Worthington  as  Provincial  visited  him  on  his 
deathbed  and  gave  him  the  Dominican  blessings,  for  already 
by  a  neighbouring  priest  the  last  Sacraments  had  been  ad- 
ministered. A  few  days  later  he  died  and  was  buried  in  the 
old  church  of  Canons  Ashby. 

The  story  of  Fr.  Dryden,  dying  dispossessed  of  lands  and 
wealth  because  of  his  faith,  reminds  us  of  the  perils  of  those 
times.  The  fragment  of  a  letter  written  from  London  by  a 
foreigner  Q  describes  the  state  of  Fr.  Albert  Lovell  who  was 
labouring  in  the  capital  as  chaplain  to  an  embassy:  "  Dear 
Friends,  poor  Lovell  is  at  last  to  be  taken  up,  upon  which  he 
is  forced  to  abscond  in  the  country.  He  begs  for  God's  sake 
his  condition  may  be  made  known  to  the  Count  of  Bornhem, 
for  unless  he  assists  him  as  in  conscience  bound,  the  poor 
man  must  be  forced  to  come  over,  for  one  that  cannot  seek 
out  bread  must  have  money  at  home.  I  am  sure  the  man 
does  not  fear,  but  prudence  teaches  us  all  to  fly  danger.    The 

1  Obituary  Notices,    p.  8. 

2  The  actual  letter,  tattered  and  frayed,  still  survives  in  the  archives 
S.  Dominic's  Priory,  London. 

O 


i94  XTbe  T&nQlisb  Dominicans 

ambassador  can't  protect  him  though  he  is  loth  to  part  with 
him,  and  promises  to  accept  him  when  the  danger  is  over, 
which  by  Christmas  I  hope  will  be.  In  the  meantime  let  all 
his  friends  know  his  condition."  The  note,  still  in  the  English 
archives,  reads  as  though  Fr.  Lovell  expected  the  Count  of 
Bornhem  to  send  him  money  to  enable  him  to  live  as  soon  as 
he  was  discharged  by  the  ambassador;  but  as  we  find  him 
back  in  Flanders  shortly  after,  as  indeed  here  he  threatens, 
it  would  seem  that  the  Count  did  nothing,  and  Lovell  was 
forced  to  suspend  his  labours. 

Again,  the  London  Evening  Post  (24  December  1745) 
refers  to  another  Dominican,  showing  us  even  at  that  date 
the  inconveniences  of  Catholic  life.1  "  Last  Sunday  (22  Dec- 
ember) several  gentlemen  in  the  commission  of  the  peace  for 
the  county  of  Surrey,  two  of  them  being  Deputy  Lieutenants, 
accompanied  by  others  on  horseback,  making  in  all  about 
thirty,  surrounded  the  house  of  Lady  Petre  at  Lower  Cheame, 
a  little  before  daybreak,  and  having  got  admittance  partly  by 
force,  proceeded  to  search  the  same,  but  found  only  two  pairs 
of  pistols,  and  a  man  concealed  between  the  ceiling  of  the 
garrets  and  the  rafters,  who  had  only  a  shirt,  a  night-gown, 
and  a  night-cap  on ;  upon  examination  he  appeared  to  have 
been  born  at  Tickel  in  Yorkshire,  and  brought  up  a  Popish 
priest  near  Antwerp.  He  prevaricated  much,  said  his  name 
was  Joseph  Morgan,  whereas  he  appears  to  be  Morgan 
Hansby,  and  that  he  had  officiated  as  priest  in  the  family 
where  he  was  taken  for  many  years.  They  brought  him  and 
three  horses  about  noon  to  Croydon.  The  occasion  of  this 
search,  which  was  contrived  and  executed  with  the  utmost 
secrecy,  was  owing  to  the  great  uneasiness  of  the  inhabitants 
of  all  the  adjacent  villages  who  firmly  believed  that  great 
numbers  of  men,  horse,  and  arms  were  concealed  there  in 
subterraneous  passages,  etc.,  but  on  the  most  diligent  search 
that  could  be  made  in  the  space  of  four  hours  nothing  more 
was  discovered  than  above  related."  Poor  Fr.  Hansbie  had 
not  prevaricated  at  all  about  his  name,  for  Joseph  was  his 
religious,  though  Morgan  his  Christian,  name.2  He  belonged 
to  a  Catholic  family  living  at  Tickhill  Castle  in  Yorkshire. 
After  this  exciting  episode  (which,  as  already  stated,  broke  up 
the  possibility  of  a  Provincial  Chapter  for  1746)  Father  Hansbie 
came,  to  London  again,  living  till  1750  near  the  Sardinian 
Chapel.  He  is  buried  in  S.  Giles'  graveyard.  He  too,  like 
Fr.  Worthington,  lived  in  Panton  Street,  but  not  with 
Mr.  Beesly.  His  host  seems  to  have  been  Mr.  Mawly. 
Other  London  addresses  of  the  English  Dominicans  about 
this  date  were  in  "Dean  Street  near  Holborn,"  in  Quebec 
Street,  "  chez  Mr.  Holland,  Palm  Street,  in  Matlock  Street 

1  No.  2S30.    Tuesday,  24  Dec.  to  Thursday,  26  Dec. 

2  Obituary  Notices,  p.   13. 


XTbe  IReoroamsation  195 

by  Hanover  Square,"  and  with  Baroness  Petre  in  Grosvenor 
Square. 

Fr.  Ambrose  Burg-is,  a  voluminous  writer  on  Church  his- 
tory,1 Fr.  John  Clarkson,-  whose  work  on  the  Rosary  Con- 
fraternity is  the  original  of  many  subsequent  books  on  the 
subject,  Fr.  Antoninus  Hatton,3  whose  amusing  letters  on 
Bishop  Challoner's  efforts  to  get  the  religious  to  surrender 
their  missions  and  retire  into  their  priories  and  monasteries, 
make  still  much  pleasant  reading,  and  suggest  another  side 
to  the  Bishop's  idealistic,  though  unpractical,  endeavours, 
were  another  group  of  vigorous  friars.  It  is  rather  interest- 
ing to  note,  as  typical  of  the  learning  of  that  day,  that  Father 
Clarkson  insisted  on  his  Dominican  pupils  being  taught  to 
defend  their  philosophical  and  theosophical  theses  in  Greek 
as  well  as  Latin.  He  held  perfect  fluency  in  Greek  to  be 
absolutely  necessary  for  workers  in  the  English  mission  on 
account  of  the  learned  controversies  in  which  they  were  very 
likely  to  become  involved.4 

Then  come  two  names  which  are  exceptional  in  the  history 
of  the  Province  because  of  their  delight  in  science.  Fr. 
Thomas  Norton,"  who  was  in  other  ways  a  character  of  some 
force,  was  a  zealous  priest.  He  is  known  to  have  walked  on 
the  same  day,  in  order  to  administer  the  Sacraments  to  dying 
penitents,  from  Hinckley,  where  he  was  stationed,  to  Leicester 
and  back,  and  to  Coventry  and  back,  a  distance  of  fifty-four 
miles.  He  was  so  poor  that  he  was  glad  to  make  a  little 
money  by  selling  the  produce  of  his  garden,  even  at  half- 
penny worths  to  poor  children.  Urged  by  economy,  it  is 
related  that  in  place  of  a  razor  strop  he  used  his  leather 
knee-breeches,  and  fared  almost  entirely  on  beans  and  bacon. 
It  seems  that  by  nature  he  was  interested  in  agricultural  pur- 
suits, for  while  in  Flanders  he  wrote  three  works,  one  on  the 
best  means  for  perfecting  the  wool  of  Flemish  sheep,  another 
on  the  employment  of  oxen  in  the  fields,  and  a  third  on  the 
value  of  the  cultivation  of  bees.  He  was  granted  a  gold  and 
a  silver  medal  for  these,  and  was  much  respected  in  Leicester- 
shire as  an  authority  on  these  points.  His  name  is  mentioned 
in  contemporary  works  on  agriculture  as  advocating  the  use 
of  oxen  in  England  as  more  economical  than  horses,  and  as 
being  an  originator  of  several  other  agricultural  experiments. 
His  great  friend,  Fr.  Hyacinth  Houghton,6  was  devoted  to  the 
more  abstract  side  of  science,  and  endeavoured  to  make 
Newton's  discoveries  popular  at  Louvain  University.  The 
theories  of  Descartes  equally  fascinated  him,  and  he  was,  in 
consequence,  looked  upon  rather  askance  by  the  venerable 
professors,  and  his  hopes  of  combining  the  new  science  with 
.the  old  scholasticism  met  with  cold  welcome  except  from  his 

1    Obituary  Notices,  p.  13.  2  Ibid.,  p.  17.  3  Ibid.,  p.  18. 

4  Ibid.,  p.  17.  5  Ibid.,  p.  21.  G  Ibid.,  p.  24. 


1 96  Zbc  JEnQlisft  Dominicans 

own  brethren.  In  the  defensions  of  three  of  his  pupils  in  1780, 
held  publicly  in  the  University  on  2  August,  he  boldly  set 
forward  his  theories.  The  publication  of  these,  some  time 
before  the  event,  roused  so  much  fierce  feeling"  and  such  an 
outcry  against  his  orthodoxy  that  Fr.  Hyacinth  was  coun- 
selled not  to  attend  the  meeting.  Indeed,  feeling  ran  so 
violently  that  he  had  to  surrender  his  chair  and  leave  for 
England.  His  views  were  certainly  very  personal;  but  his 
fine  understanding  soon  found  other  outlets  for  its  vigour. 
No  mean  poet,  he  wrote  voluminously  for  the  periodicals  of 
his  day ;  and  his  classical  accomplishments  proved  of  great 
solace  to  him  during  his  mission  work  in  England.  His  truly 
temperamental  carelessness  in  the  matter  of  dress  nearly  got 
him  haled  off  by  a  press  gang  for  the  navy;  indeed,  he  was 
already  being  marched  off  unwillingly  to  sea  when  a  friend 
recognized  him  and  intervened,  and  by  means  of  some  expen- 
diture in  the  way  of  grog,  secured  his  freedom. 

The  French  Revolution,  when  the  Republican  troops  over- 
ran Flanders  in  1795,  cut  off  Bornhem  from  the  Province. 
Some  of  the  fathers  fled  home  to  England;  in  possession  of 
the  house  were  left  Fr.  Dominic  Fenwick  (an  American 
citizen),  a  novice,  and  three  Flemish  lay-brothers.  The  soldiers 
sacked  the  convent  and  set  fire  to  it,  while  Fr.  Fenwick  was 
led  off  a  prisoner.  His  nationality,  however,  soon  secured 
him  his  liberty,  and  he  followed  on  with  the  other  friar  to 
England.  An  attempt  in  1797  to  re-establish  the  priory 
speedily  failed;  and  finally,  in  1825,  the  property  was  sold.1 
The  house  at  Louvain  suffered  a  similar  fate,  except  that  the 
Government  established  in  its  place  two  burses  at  the 
University,  for  the  use  of  English  youths  as  some  sort  of 
compensation.2  The  Dominican  Provincial  of  1839  petitioned 
the  Home  Government  that  English  Dominican  youths  might 
have  preference  over  others,  and  as  this  was  granted  the 
English  Province  still  enjoys  the  use  of  them. 

The  material  foundations  secured  by  Cardinal  Howard, 
therefore,  by  the  beginning  of  last  century  had  failed. 
Bornhem  was  a  ruin,  the  Brussels'  nunnery  a  washhouse 
for  soldiers'  clothing,  the  Louvain  house  of  studies  an  empty 
building ;  but  the  work,  though  seemingly  so  near  its  fall, 
prospered  on.  The  nuns  were  settled  soon  at  Hartpury,  the 
school  moved  to  Carshalton,  and  the  fathers  remained  at  the 
old  missions,  chiefly  in  the  northern  counties  of  Northumber- 
land and  York,  and  in  the  midland  county  of  Leicestershire. 

Then  came  a  sudden  blow  which  nearly  destroyed  the  Pro- 
vince entirely — a  long  hesitation  for  fifty  years,  a  wonder 
whether  life  could  ever  return  to  so  wasted  a  Province,  then 
the  gradual  opening  out  in  numbers  and  work  will  bring  the 
story  to  the  twentieth  century. 

1  Merry  England,  Feb.-March,  1891.  -  Ibid.,  Aug.-Nov.,  1891. 


CHAPTER  X 
THE   RESTORATION 

IN  1806  a  new  Master-General,  Fr.  Pius  Joseph  Gaddi, 
was  appointed  by  Pope  Pius  VII,  and  in  his  first 
encyclical  letter  he  alluded  to  that  blow  which  nearly 
broke  up  completely  all  the  work  of  Cardinal  Howard, 
namely,  the  establishment  of  the  new  Dominican  Pro- 
vince of  the  United  States.1  On  13  April  of  the  same  year 
the  Provincial  Chapter  in  London,  while  electing-  Fr.  Pius 
Potier  as  Provincial,  noted  the  names  of  several  who  had 
gone  out  of  the  Province,  and  petitioned  that  in  their  places 
other  officials  should  be  appointed.  These  had  left  to  found 
the  American  Province  dedicated  to  S.  Joseph. 

To  understand  the  crippling-  effect  of  this  new  foundation 
and  the  subsequent  reaction,  it  is  necessary  to  remember  that 
Bornhem  Priory  was  in  the  hands  of  strangers,  that  Car- 
shalton  had  just  been  set  up  at  great  expense  as  a  school  and 
noviciate,  and  that  the  re-establishment  of  regular  religious 
life  seemed  hopeless  for  ever  in  England.  Politically  and 
ecclesiastically,  the  English  friars  of  S.  Dominic  found  that 
they  had  little  chance  of  future  success,  for  the  British  Govern- 
ment still  refused,  though  it  promised,  emancipation,  and  the 
Vicars-Apostolic  were  in  no  sense  favourable  to  the  work  of 
religious  on  the  English  mission.  Among  the  last  group  that 
had  clung  to  Bornhem  when  the  Republican  troops  of  France 
entered  as  spoilers  was  Fr.  Dominic  Fenwick,  an  American 
citizen,  who  now,  struck  by  the  deep  afflictions  of  the  English 
Province,  and  with  intent  to  help  it,  began  to  revive  an  earlier 
dream  of  his,  the  establishment  of  a  Dominican  Priory  in  his 
native  land.  He  applied  first  to  the  English  Provincial,  who 
readily  consented;  to  the  Bishop  of  Baltimore,  whose  approval 
was  easily  secured  ;  and  finally  to  the  Roman  authorities,  who 
empowered  him  to  proceed  on  his  work,  and  gave  leave  for 
him  to  take  with  him  to  his  far-off  home  any  French  or 
Flemish  Dominicans,  or  even  any  properly  qualified  religious 
from  England.  Fr.  Dominic  then  addressed  a  circular  to  the 
Catholics  of  Great  Britain,  announcing  his  intention  and  ask- 
ing for  alms.  Money  came  to  him  to  a  considerable  amount, 
so  that  in  1804,  about  the  middle  of  May,  he  was  able  to  sail 
to  Maryland,  taking  with  him  Fr.  Antoninus  Angier,  a  pro- 
minent member  of  the  English  Province.  His  immediate 
success  naturally  attracted  other  English  Dominicans  to  follow 
him  over  sea,  so  that  Fr.  Thomas  Wilson  and  Fr.  Raymund 
Tuite  petitioned  for  leave  to  join  the  infant  Province.  The 
beginnings  of  strained  feelings  over  this  affair  are  now  first 
observable,    for  the  Provincial,  in  letting  these  go,   yielded 

1  The  references  are  to  letters  and  documents  in  the  archives,  S. 
Dominic's  Priory,  London. 

197 


198  Ubc  JEnglisb  ^Dominicans 

only  to  necessity,  endeavouring  in  vain  to  prevent  the  loss  of 
two  more  fathers.  By  this  time  the  Dominicans  had  so  suc- 
cessfully acted  as  missionaries,  and  had  taken  so  strong  a 
position  in  Catholic  life,  that  the  first  Bishop  of  New  York 
was  consecrated  from  among  them,  and  Fr.  Dominic  was 
himself  made  first  Bishop  of  Cincinnati.1 

While  in  the  United  States  things  were  thus  triumphantly 
marching  to  success,  in  England  the  Province  seemed  only  to 
grow  more  enfeebled.  There  had  been  one  bright  gleam  of 
hope  when  the  father  of  one  of  the  refugee  boys  from 
Bornhem  bought  and  handed  over  to  the  English  Dominicans 
a  large  mansion  at  Carshalton,  built  by  Inigo  Jones  in  1640." 
There  was  some  prospect  of  setting  up  regular  life  and 
monastic  observance,  but  the  attempt  to  practice  openly  reli- 
gious life  met  with  unfavourable  comment  from  English 
politicians,  and  had  to  be  abandoned.  As  a  school,  however, 
Carshalton  maintained  a  steady  average  of  fifty  boys,  mostly 
belonging  to  wealthy  families  in  and  around  London.  But 
gradually  the  increasing  demands  of  the  English  mission 
called  away  several  fathers,  till  at  last,  in  1806,  one  alone 
was  left  who  could  continue  the  college  by  the  aid  of  salaried 
masters.  This  meant  a  financial  drain  which  the  Province  was 
wholly  unable  to  meet.  By  1810  the  debt  incurred  amounted 
to  ;£6,ooo,  which  was  considered  so  ruinous  a  sum  that  the 
whole  establishment  was  closed  down  by  order  of  the  Pro- 
vincial Chapter  assembled  that  year  actually  in  Carshalton. 
Indeed,  so  desperate  seemed  the  condition  of  the  Province,  so 
gloomy  its  prospects,  so  few  its  members,  that  the  Capitular 
Fathers  were  in  favour  of  breaking  up  the  English  Province 
completely,  a  step  from  which  they  were  deterred  by  the 
solitary  exception  of  Fr.  Albert  Underhill,3  who  flatly  refused 
to  assent  to  the  proposition,  and,  heartened  by  despair,  under- 
took himself  to  educate  postulants  for  the  Order  rather  than 
see  it  fail  for  want  of  courage  and  faith.  His  energy  inspired 
respect  and  tolerance,  and  in  his  mission  at  Leeds  he  set  to 
work  at  once  to  redeem  his  promise.  Before  he  died  he  had 
begun  to  gather  some  young  men  around  him. 

In  1814  the  chapter  met  at  Leicester,  and  as  by  now  Cars- 
halton had  ceased  to  be  in  Dominican  hands,  the  noviciate 
was  formally  transferred  to  Hinckley,  where  since  1765  a 
mission  had  been  established.4  Here  in  1822  another  Pro- 
vincial Chapter  was  held,  which  now  so  far  believed  in  its 
own  prospects  of  final  settlement  as  to  protest  violently  to 
the  Master-General  against  the  proposed  amalgamation  of 
England  and  America  in  one  province.  It  is  strange  that  so 
soon  after  the  War  of  Independence  there  should  have  been 

1   Obituary  Notices,  p.  26.  2  Merry  England,  Feb.,  1889. 

:!   Obituary  Notices,  p.  23. 

4  Conway,  O.P.,  History  of  Hinckley,  for  account  of  this  ancient 
Catholic  mission. 


Ube  IRestoration  199 

found  people  to  suppose  these  now  separate  nations  could 
work  in  harmony.  Stranger,  too,  is  it  to  note  that  the  one 
who  was  most  vehement  and  violent  in  working  for  this  union 
should  have  been  an  American  Dominican,  who  had  previously 
been  a  British  officer.  This  eccentric  but  forcible  friar, 
Fr.  Augustine  Hill,  who  had  been  a  constant  visitor  at  Born- 
hem,  had  persuaded  his  wife  to  live  on  a  separate  jointure  of 
;£ioo  a  year,  and  had  entered  the  Dominican  Order  at  the 
Minerva  in  Rome.  He  was  affiliated  to  the  Province  of  the 
United  States  in  1819  by  taking  his  solemn  vows  .for  the 
priory  of  S.  Rose  in  Kentucky,  which  he  did  "kneeling  On 
the  tomb  of  Cardinal  Howard."  In  1817  the  idea  of  the  union 
of  the  two  Provinces  had  been  first  broached  by  the  American 
fathers,  and  Fr.  Augustine  Hill,  ordained  in  1819 — within 
eighteen  months  of  his  reception  into  the  Order — set  to  work 
to  secure  this  end  by  means  of  compulsion  from  Rome.  He 
wrote  attractively  to  the  English  Provincial,  describing  in 
glowing'  terms  the  wonderful  American  progress,  and  offered 
him  as  a  noviciate,  the  priory  of  San  Clemente  in  Rome,  which 
he  declared  the  Irish  fathers  had  surrendered  two  years  pre- 
viously. His  military  training  peeps  out  in  his  describing  the 
convent  as  "  within  gun-shot  of  S.  John  Lateran,"  adding  his 
hope  that  the  convent  will  serve  also  as  a  noviciate  for  young 
Americans  who,  when  in  their  own  country,  "so  near  home 
and  accustomed  to  liberty  are  not  much  inclined  to  embrace 
religious  life,  but  being  sent  over  voting  might  more  easily  be 
trained  to  discipline."  Fr.  Pius  Potier,  the  Provincial,1  con- 
tributed no  suggestions  over  the  policy  of  "catching  them 
young,"  and  declined  the  Roman  proposal  as  being  in  his 
judgment  altogether  impracticable.  Fr.  Hill  retorted  that  as 
Bornhem  property  stood  in  the  names  of  himself  and  Fr.  Wil- 
son, both  now  members  of  the  American  Province,  the  English 
Provincial  had  only  the  right  to  claim  half  of  the  money  ob- 
tained by  its  sale.  For  six  months  negotiations  dragged  on 
while  Fr.  Potier  went  to  Bornhem  to  secure  what  best  he 
might  out  of  the  proceeds  of  the  public  auction.  In  October 
1820  the  two  negotiators  were  becoming  very  heated,  Fr. 
Augustine  Hill  insisting  on  his  claims  to  "  poor  old  Bornhem," 
and  denouncing  the  successive  English  Provincials  for  their 
remissness  in  answering  letters.  He  describes  the  home  Pro- 
vince of  this  date:  "Your  Province  is  without  a  convent, 
stripped  of  the  Habit,  aged  and  infirm,  hastening  rapidly  to 
dissolution.  .  .  .  Under  these  circumstances  it  is  pleasing  to 
me  to  be  commissioned  to  make  you  the  proposal  of  a  union 
for  our  mutual  advantage  and  the  good  of  the  Order  and 
religion  in  general.  .  .  .  We  will  educate  free  of  expense  such 
young  men  as  you  shall  send  over  who  when  ordained  shall 

1   Obituary  Notices,  p.  27. 


200  Ube  English  Dominicans 

be  entirely  at  your  disposal  " — a  prospect  calculated  to  appeal 
to  a  harassed  Provincial  without  a  convent  or  the  funds  neces- 
sary to  acquire  one ;  but  the  Americans  asked  in  exchange  a 
share  in  all  the  moneys  then  in  the  hands  of  the  English 
fathers.  Fr.  Potier's  answer  was  kindly  but  firm.  He  acknow- 
ledged the  generous  offer  of  free  education  for  English  novices 
among  the  Americans,  and  was  grateful  for  it:  "I  should 
however  have  regarded  this  generous. offer  with  a  keener  sense 
of  gratitude  had  it  not  been  accompanied  by  a  kind  of  obscure 
menace  in  the  following  words:  '  Let  me  beg  of  you  to  take 
this  proposal  seriously  into  your  consideration ;  by  acceding 
to  it  you  will  prevent  much  unpleasant  discussion. '  What  this 
unpleasant  discussion  can  mean  I  am  quite  at  a  loss  to  con- 
ceive, unless  it  allude  to  our  Bornhem  property,  which  I  cer- 
tainly do  not  mean  tamely  to  give  up,  as  the  whole  of  your 
arguments  by  which  you  endeavour  to  establish  Fr.  Wilson's 
claim  to  that  property  originate  in  a  mistake."  For  some 
more  months  the  affair  lingered  on,  as  the  Provincial  was  laid 
up  in  England  with  rheumatic  fever,  and  was  unable  to  obey 
Propaganda's  command  to  repair  forthwith  in  person  to  Rome. 
The  feeling  of  the  Roman  authorities  was  wholly  on  the  side 
of  Fr.  Hill,  whose  memoranda  had  deeply  impressed  them 
with  the  hopeless  future  of  the  English  Province.  But  in  May 
1821  Fr.  Hill  left  Italy  for  America,  and  his  cause,  deprived 
of  his  active  support,  was  further  weakened  by  the  fatal  ill- 
ness of  the  Cardinal  Protector  and  by  the  apoplectic  seizure 
of  the  acting  Master-General,  both  determined  advocates  of 
the  union  of  the  two  Provinces. 

Just  at  this  juncture  Fr.  Ambrose  Woods1  was  elected  Pro- 
vincial in  the  chapter  of  1822,  and  his  bustling  energy  quickly 
turned  the  scale.  A  brief  entry  in  his  diary  sums  up  his  whole 
attitude:  "May  2,  1822,  wrote  to  Fr.  O'Finan  [an  Irish 
Dominican  who  acted  in  the  Generalizia  for  the  English  speak- 
ing Provinces],  objecting  to  the  journey  to  Rome,  ignorance 
of  routine  etc.  Expense.  Congregations. — -To  Union,  Ameri- 
cans aliens,  distance,  expense  of  intercourse  ...  to  claims 
upon  our  property:  individuals  have  no  claim  beyond  personal 
maintenance.  English  Province  exists:  so  long  as  it  does, 
the  funds  appropriated  are  its  inalienable  property,  afterwards 
applicable  exclusively  to  English  mission."  His  letters  to 
Rome  finally  settled  the  matter,  for  though  the  Americans 
still  cherished  the  project,  and  in  their  friendly  intercourse 
with  the  English  visited  England  to  impress  their  views  on  the 
fathers,  no  longer  was  there  any  further  talk  of  compulsion, 
nor  were  any  more  efforts  made  to  claim  Bornhem  for  America, 
or  as  part  of  the  personal  effects  of  Fr.  Hill  or  Fr.  Wilson. 

But  this  controversy  and  the  misfortunes  of  the  Province 

1    Obituary  Notices,  p.  26. 


To  face  p.  200 


Uhc  IRestoration  201 

cast  a  gloom,  settled  and  continuous,  over  the  fathers.  In 
1823  a  large  house  was  erected  at  Hinckley,  and  a  school  for 
a  limited  number  of  scholars  established  with  some  measure 
of  success;  but  by  1832  there  were  only  three  of  the  fathers 
of  Bornhem  still  alive,  besides  two  foreign  Dominicans  who 
in  1794  had  fled  into  England.1  Since  1817  six  had  joined  the 
Province  at  Hinckley,  but  two  of  them  had  died.  Thus  the 
Province  was  now  reduced  to  nine  priests  in  all,  of  whom  five 
were  so  aged  as  to  be  unable  to  take  any  part  at  all  in  the  life 
of  the  missions.  Moreover,  in  order  to  secure  even  the  possi- 
bility of  continuance,  it  was  necessary  to  concentrate  upon 
Hinckley,  so  as  to  obtain  some  sort  of  centre  in  which  novices 
might  be  trained  and  educated.  This  entailed  the  sacrifice  of 
many  missions,  some  of  which  had  been  in  Dominican  hands 
for  many  years.  These  were  now,  by  an  act  of  sacrifice 
whereby  the  future  Province  and  not  the  actual  was  unself- 
ishly considered,  surrendered  to  the  Vicars  Apostolic  for  the 
use  of  the  secular  clergy.  In  1830  Hexham  was  given  up,  in 
1833  Leeds,  in  1S34  Weybridge.  Between  1832  and  1850  four 
new  subjects  joined  the  Order,  but  the  loss  of  seven  brought 
the  number  down  to  six,  which  was  even  lower  than  it  had 
been  in  1645  when  Cardinal  Howard  became  an  English 
friar. 

In  1850  three  of  the  Province,  who  alone  had  any  right  to  be 
present,  and  yet  could  not  by  themselves  form  canonically  a 
sufficient  quorum  to  transact  the  business  requisite,  attended 
the  Chapter  of  1850  on  28  August  at  Hinckley.  A  fourth  was 
added  by  the  direction  of  the  Master-General.  The  following 
day  was  occupied  in  discussing  the  affairs  of  the  Province, 
particularly  the  place  of  the  noviciate,  since  the  arrangement 
of  the  house  at  Hinckley  made  the  due  observance  of  the  rule 
almost  impossible.  The  discussion  was  prolonged  anxiously 
till  the  third  day  (30  August)  as  the  General  desired  that 
Perugia  or  Viterbo  should  be  chosen  in  preference  to  any 
English  or  other  continental  priory.  In  the  midst  of  the  pro- 
ceedings the  arrival  of  a  stranger  totally  changed  the  tone, 
not  of  the  Chapter  only,  but  of  the  Province,  and  illumined 
with  gleams  of  hope  the  English  friars.  An  Oxford  convert, 
who  had  preceded  Newman  into  the  fold  of  Christ,  Mr.  Leigh, 
of  Woodchester  Park,  had  come  in  person  to  offer  to  the 
fathers  the  church,  lands,  and  endowments  at  Woodchester 
which  he  had  given  to  the  Passionists,  but  which  they  now 
desired  to  abandon.  He  was  entirely  unacquainted  with  any 
of  the  fathers,  but  had  been  struck  by  the  beauty  of  the  habit 
which  he  had  seen  for  the  first  time  at  the  consecration  of  the 
church  at  Erdington  in  the  July  of  the  same  year.  This  at- 
tracted him  to  the  Order,  and  his  generous  offer  was  accord- 

1   Obituary  Aro/ices,  p.  27  (Fathers  Caestryck  and  Le  Febvre). 


202  ufoe  iSnglisfo  Dominicans 

ingly  made.  Under  God's  design  it  is  to  him  that  the  con- 
tinuance of  the  English  Province  is  due.  A  noviciate  so  distant 
as  Perugia  would  have  appealed  to  a  very  limited  number ; 
whereas,  a  house  established  in  England,  where  the  full  cloistral 
life  might  be  duly  carried  out,  and  whither  people  could  come 
to  inspect  it,  afforded  far  more  chance  of  attracting  English 
folk  to  the  Order.  The  offer  was  too  generous  to  be  refused.  It 
was  accepted  at  once.  The  General's  approbation  was  solicited. 
An  agreement  was  drawn  up  between  Mr.  Leigh  and  the  Pro- 
vincial, modified,  and  finally  completed  in  July  185 1. 

Woodchester  was  soon  colonized  from  Hinckley,  and 
Mr.  Leigh  lodged  in  his  own  house  the  community  of  two 
that  took  possession  on  8  October  1850.  Then  on  the  16th 
they  moved  down  to  the  house  just  abandoned  by  the  Passion- 
ists,  where  Fr.  Dominic  had  lived,  whose  blessed  privilege  it 
was  to  receive  Newman  to  the  Faith.  Help  was  obtained  from 
Ireland  to  enable  classes  to  be  established  for  postulants  and 
novices;  the  Master-General  (Pere  Jandel)  himself  arrived  on 
visitation  to  foster  by  his  advice,  and  to  inspire  with  that 
enthusiasm  which  Lacordaire  had  just  lately  so  infectiously 
stirred  in  the  youth  of  France,  the  re-born  English  Province. 
On  his  return  to  Rome  Pere  Jandel  despatched  Fr.  Thomas 
Burke,  then  only  a  deacon,  to  live  at  Woodchester,  whence 
he  began  to  display  that  wonder  of  eloquence  destined  to 
hold  spellbound  a  generation  of  Catholics.  On  1  May  1851 
the  first  stone  of  the  present  priory  was  laid  by  Mr.  Leigh, 
with  Charles  Hansom  as  architect.  On  6  August  1853,  the 
community  moved  in  to  the  barely  finished  structure  which 
was  solemnly  blessed  on  1 1  August,  in  the  absence  of  the 
Bishop  of  the  diocese,  by  the  Bishop  of  Newport  and  Me- 
nevia.  On  23  June  1854  Woodchester  was  created  a  priory 
with  full  canonical  rights,  and  thenceforward  regular  Do- 
minican life,  with  elections,  chapters,  and  the  complete  organ- 
ization legislated  for  in  the  constitutions  of  the  Order  has 
gradually  come  into  existence.  Thus  were  redeemed  the 
hopeful  promises  which  in  1814  seemed  so  illusory  to  all  save 
Fr.  Albert  Underhill ;  thus  too  was  the  larger  hope  of  Cardinal 
Howard,  laboured  for  yet  seeming  so  near  destruction,  finally 
achieved ;  and  thus  even  the  far-off  prophecies  of  the  exiled 
Prior  of  Smithfield,  age  by  age  refuted,  were  at  last  fulfilled. 

Even  another  province,  American,  but  not  of  the  United 
States,  received  from  the  English  friars  a  welcome  and  a 
home.  To  Woodchester  for  many  years  came  the  novices  of 
the  Californian  Province  till  their  own  organization  and  de- 
velopment allowed  them  to  establish  in  their  own  country  a 
noviciate  house  with  its  full  regular  observance. 

By  1850,  therefore,  the  Dominicans  in  England  were  con- 
centrated at  Hinckley,  Leicester,  and  Woodchester,  while 
acting  also  as  chaplains  to  the  Sisters  of  the  Second  Order 


Ube  "{Restoration  203 

established  first  at  Hartpury,  then  at  Atherstone.  In  1857 
they  still  further  progressed  by  opening"  a  church  and  mission 
at  Stroud.  Three  years  later  they  moved  to  Newcastle-on- 
Tyne,  and  there  also  began  to  take  over  parish  work.  Their 
beginnings  were  made  easier  for  them  by  the  entrance  into 
the  Order  of  a  priest  who  was  already  in  charge  of  a  mission 
in  Newcastle,  and  who  therefore,  by  the  kindness  of  the  Bishop, 
handed  over  his  church  and  parish  to  the  Dominicans  until 
their  own  priory  should  be  erected  and  their  parish  abso- 
lutely marked  out.  In  consequence  therefore  of  this,  in  i860 
S.  Andrew's  Church  in  Pilgrim  Street,  and  the  parish  attached 
to  it,  were  taken  over  by  Fr.  Paul  Utili  and  Fr.  Morewood. 

In  1869  the  foundation  stone  of  the  new  church  was  laid  by 
Bishop  Chadwick  of  Hexham  and  Newcastle  on  14  Septem- 
ber, and  on  10  September  1873  it  was  solemnly  opened  and 
dedicated.  The  Bishop  of  Hexham  and  Newcastle  sang  the 
High  Mass,  in  the  presence  of  Bishop  Clifford  of  Clifton  and 
Bishop  Amherst  of  Northampton — both  exceedingly  faithful 
benefactors  to  the  children  of  S.  Dominic.  Archbishop 
Manning  preached.  At  the  time  the  friars  numbered  five 
priests  and  three  lay-brothers.  Since  then  a  good  deal  of 
development  has  taken  place.  At  the  Priory,  where  the 
church  remains  as  a  tribute  to  the  genius  of  the  architect 
and  to  the  faith  of  Fr.  Antoninus  Williams,  it  has  been  found 
that  the  work  has  increased,  and  the  needs  of  the  people 
have  perpetually  to  be  met  by  new  and  wider  opportunities 
given  them  for  receiving  the  sacraments  and  attending  the 
sacred  liturgy.  Now  a  community  of  ten  priests  finds  itself 
not  able  to  manag'e  the  whole  district,  and  a  second  church 
has  been  built,  and  a  separate  parish  cut  out  where  two  other 
Dominicans  are  stationed.  Yet  even  so  the  work  for  souls 
multiplies ;  and  a  new  and  third  church  must  be  opened  to 
supply  the  hard-working  population  with  the  conveniences  of 
the  Faith. 

While  in  this  way  the  North  of  England,  which  had  been 
served  so  long  by  Dominicans,  thus  became  the  settled  home 
of  a  priory  where  parish  work  was  sanctified  by  the  regular 
observance  of  the  cloister,  and  while  the  house  at  Leicester 
linked  Woodchester  to  its  farthest  neighbour,  it  was  realized 
that  London  too  should  be  searched  for  a  fitting  site.  Hither 
also  were  the  friars  drawn  by  the  personal  and  pressing  in- 
vitation of  Cardinal  Wiseman.  It  was  part  of  his  policy  to 
get  the  religious  Orders  to  accept  parishes,  though  such  an 
act  might  to  many  seem  opposed  to  the  traditional  attitude 
of  their  institute  and  rule.  However,  in  a  letter  of  exceeding 
pathos  the  Cardinal  pleaded  most  earnestly  with  the  children 
of  S.  Dominic  to  come  to  the  rescue  of  souls.  The  Catholic 
Church  of  England  was  beginning  to  increase  at  a  very  wel- 
come rate,  and  was  multiplying  beyond  all  the  means  then 


204  Ube  Bnglisb  Dominicans 

existent  for  providing-  the  "  new  people  "  with  spiritual  neces- 
sities ;  the  result  was  that  the  Dominicans  found  themselves 
faced  with  the  alternatives,  either  of  leaving-  the  faithful  with- 
out Mass  and  sacraments,  or  of  forswearing  for  a  time  their 
own  spiritual  luxuries  of  religious  life.  Thus  sharply  put,  the 
alternatives  ceased  really  to  perplex  them.  They  could  only 
dare  make  the  sacrifice  of  their  personal  privileges.  Yet  that 
it  was  a  sacrifice  is  perfectly  clear.  After  centuries  of  scat- 
tered existence  in  lonely  missions  in  England,  and  the  long 
fight  that  followed  upon  the  setting-up  of  the  American 
Province,  the  English  Dominicans  had  come  after  a  short 
and  bitter  suspense  into  peace  and  quiet.  The  offer  of  Wood- 
chester  by  Mr.  Leigh  appeared  to  them  to  be  God's  direct 
pointing  out  of  what  He  wished  done,  and  they  understood  it 
precisely  in  the  sense  that  they  were  to  concentrate  on  the 
safeguards  of  religious  and  cloistral  observance.  Suddenly, 
>  when  all  this  was  settled  and  evident,  they  were  asked,  and 
in  the  name  of  principles  of  which  the  sanction  and  the 
authority  were  equally  convincing  to  put  themselves  back  for 
some  years,  to  go  into  their  parochial  existence  again  from 
which  as  they  thought  they  had  finally  emerged.  But  the 
principles  were  sacred,  the  appeal  beyond  resistance  ;  they 
agreed  to  establish  themselves  in  London. 

Before  the  foundation  of  Newcastle,  in  the  year  1861, 
Cardinal  Wiseman  first  approached  the  Dominicans  with  the 
proposal  that  they  should  settle  on  the  northern  heights  of 
the  metropolis.  His  romantic  and  luxuriant  fancy  saw  the 
religious  Orders  perched  on  the  hills  round  London,  lifting 
up  their  hands  in  prayer  for  the  city  at  their  feet.  They  were 
to  be  "sconces  of  prayer"  for  the  city  lying  beneath  them, 
flaring  out  their  Divine  Office  and  the  mingled  austerity  and 
joyfulness  of  their  lives  in  perpetual  supplication  for  the 
"mart  of  many  nations,"  as  S.  Bede  picturesquely  calls  the 
London  of  his  day.  But  to  the  work  of  contemplation  they 
were  to  add  the  burdens  of  parochial  responsibility.  The 
Catholics  of  that  date,  we  have  remarked,  could  hardly  afford 
the  luxury  of  supporting  religious  Orders  whose  labours  did 
not  also  include  the  care  of  souls.  With  this  double  aspect  in 
view  Wiseman  approached  Fr.  Augustine  Procter,  then  Pro- 
vincial of  the  English  Dominicans,  offering  him  a  parish  be- 
tween the  existing  churches  of  Hampstead  and  Somerstown, 
both  of  which  owed  their  existence  to  emigre  French  clergy. 

Together  the  Cardinal  and  Provincial  surveyed  the  ground. 
The  Provincial,  with  an  eye  to  rigid  economy,  chose  some 
smaller  site  than  pleased  the  buoyant  optimism  of  the  Car- 
dinal. He  preferred  a  large  open  space  of  just  over  three 
acres  that  lay  between  S.  Pancras  Almshouses  and  a  strip  of 
land  that  went  by  the  name  of  "  Mr.  Gibbon's."  The  long 
frontage  that  faced  the   unkempt    Southampton    Road  gave 


XTbe  IRestoration  205 

promise  of  great  opportunity,  and,  as  was  his  wont,  the 
Cardinal  used  it  for  the  text  of  a  prophetic  vision  of  teeming- 
populations  and  crowded  congregations.  Fr.  Procter,  who 
possessed  little  emotion,  and  was  careful  to  hide  even  such  as 
he  had,  was  content  with  the  command  of  his  prelate,  and, 
with  characteristic  determination,  set  about  the  task  of 
acquiring  the  property  pointed  out  to  him.  By  March  1862 
the  whole  plot  was  bought  through  the  generosity  of  a  novice 
at  Woodchester,  and  even  earlier  (27  January)  the  neighbour- 
ing mission  of  Kentish  Town  was  taken  over  by  Fr.  Dominic 
Aylward,  that  fine  scholar  and  accomplished  poet,  and  Fr. 
Albert  Buckler,  just  beginning  his  zealous  career  as  a  preacher. 
Within  another  year  the  foundation  stone  of  the  present  priory 
was  laid  by  Pere  Jandel,  Master-General  of  the  Order,  one  of 
the  earliest  companions  of  Lacordaire.  As  was  only  fitting, 
this  function  took  place  in  the  presence  of  the  inspirer  oi:  the 
project,  his  Eminence  Cardinal  Wiseman,  accompanied  by 
Bishop  Clifford  and  Provost  Manning.  Not  till  mid-June  1867 
was  the  priory  so  far  advanced  that  the  community  could 
move  into  the  new  building-,  the  actual  date  being  14  June. 
On  the  evening  of  that  day  Fr.  Rooke,  first  superior  of  the  little 
group  of  four  Dominicans,  and  subsequently  (20  December 
1868)  first  prior  of  S.  Dominic's,  Haverstock  Hill,  blessed  the 
temporary  church,  and  next  morning  for  the  first  time  Mass 
was  said  on  the  stretch  of  ground  occupied  by  the  prior} 
buildings.  On  10  October  1867  the  priory  was  solemnly 
opened  by  Archbishop  Manning.  The  building  of  the  church 
went  on  fitfully,  partly  because  of  want  of  funds,  partly 
because  the  designs  for  the  structure  were  constantly  chang- 
ing shape  in  the  minds  of  succeeding  priors,  partly  because 
no  one  yet  had  the  courage,  energy,  and  genius  to  carry 
through  so  enormous  an  undertaking.  But  just  as  Newcastle 
waited  for  Fr.  Antoninus  Williams  to  set  its  church  a-building, 
so  Haverstock  Hill  also  required  his  presence  for  its  accom- 
plishment. First  as  Prior,  and  later  as  Provincial,  he  super- 
intended, cared  for,  watched  its  growth;  not  as  a  spectator, 
but  as  the  "sole  begetter"  of  the  grandeur  of  its  design 
and  the  idealism  of  its  height  and  ample  proportions. 
Fittingly  it  was  he  who  said  the  first  Mass  in  it,  at  the 
Rosary  Altar  on  28  May  1883.  On  31  May,  the  solemn 
opening  took  place ;  High  Mass  was  sung  by  Bishop  Clifford 
of  Clifton,  who  had  so  many  years  before  witnessed  the  laying 
of  the  foundation  stone.  The  sermon  was  preached  by  the 
famous  Irish  Dominican  preacher,  Fr.  Thomas  Burke,  then 
in  a  dying  condition.  Five  weeks  later  he  went  to  his  reward. 
But  the  establishment  of  this  priory,  most  of  all  the  raising  of 
so  noble  a  church,  gave  the  Province  a  stability  and  a  source 
of  energy  which  have  proved  of  incalculable  importance.  The 
centre    of  Dominican  life  has   swung  from  Woodchester  to 


206  ube  j£ngltsb  Dominicans 

London,  and  the  ideal,  the  true  Dominican  ideal,  of  mis- 
sionary life  among"  the  English  people,  has  been  seized  upon 
as  dominant  in  English  conditions.  After  the  long  restlessness 
of  penal  times  and  the  necessary  disturbances  of  religious  life 
in  England,  came  the  gradual  stillness  and  peace,  almost,  we 
might  say,  the  religious  luxury  of  cloistral  life  at  Wood- 
chester.  Under  the  first  superiors,  urged  on  by  Pere  Jandel 
and  by  another  French  Dominican,  who,  like  Jandel,  was  one 
of  Lacordaire's  earliest  little  band,  Pere  Gonin,  Prior  of 
Wcodchester,  and  later  on  Archbishop  of  Trinidad,  the 
Dominicans  were  in  great  likelihood  of  remaining  in  their 
mountain  fastness  among  the  Cotswold  Hills,  and  making  up 
for  the  lost  centuries  by  a  long  spell  of  religious  peace.  But 
the  movement  to  London  made  such  a  reaction  impossible,  as 
at  the  same  time,  curiously  enough,  it  destroyed  the  habit  of 
isolated  and  local  missions.  For  while,  largely  under  foreign 
inspiration,  the  majority  craved  for  the  complete  contempla- 
tive life  then  found  at  Woodchester,  a  few,  who  were  unfitted 
for  so  rigorous  an  interpretation  of  community  obligation, 
were  driven  to  set  up  single  country  parishes.  They  could  not 
secure  from  Dominican  government  that  neat  adjustment  of 
action  and  contemplation  which  is  the  high  ideal  of  the  Order, 
and  unable  to  endure  the  extremity  of  one,  since  there  was  no 
middle  course,  could  only  adopt  the  extremity  of  the  other. 

The  priory  of  Haverstock  Hill  solved  this  problem  by 
showing  how  it  was  possible  to  combine  parochial  life,  care- 
fully and  conscientiously  carried  out,  with  the  choral  and  com- 
munity obligations  attached  by  custom  and  legislation  to  the 
constitutions  of  the  Preaching  Friars;  and  while  doing  this  at 
the  same  time  necessitated  the  surrender  of  the  small  local 
missions  in  order  to  secure  for  it  a  large  community.  Thus 
Market  Harborough  (1847-1872),  Nevill  Holt  (1847-1859), 
Haunton  Hall  (1861-1867),  Husbands  Bosworth  (1868-1873), 
Littlehampton  (1863-1873)  were  begun  under  pressure  of 
Woodchester  and  given  up  under  pressure  of  London. 

Then  with  the  priories  of  Woodchester,  Leicester,  London, 
Newcastle,  and  Hinckley  (though  this  was  rather  the  centre 
of  a  school  than  a  real  priory  in  the  canonical  sense  of  the 
word),  there  came  along  pause.  From  1867  to  1894  no  single 
house  where  community  life  might  be  lived  was  founded  or 
even  begun. 

There  were,  however,  the  two  missions  of  Stone  and  Stoke, 
which  will  be  treated  of  when  the  enormous  development  of 
Tertiary  life  is  explained.  Beyond  these  two  there  is  no 
foundation  (save  for  those  small  country  missions,  chiefly  in 
and  around  Leicestershire)  between  Newcastle  and  Hawkes- 
yard.  This  latter  was  the  generous  legacy  of  Mr.  Josiah 
Spode,  anticipated  by  the  munificence  of  his  niece,  Miss 
Helen  Gulson.    Mr.  Spode  had  become  a  Catholic,  and  having 


ZEbe  "[Restoration  207 

no  children  to  follow  him,  desired  that  his  Staffordshire  pro- 
perty (acquired  by  his  mother,  who  inherited  wealth  of  her 
own  as  well  as  succeeding-  to  that  of  the  famous  originator  of 
the  Spode  china)  should  come  into  the  hands  of  religious.  His 
choice  finally  lay  with  the  English  Dominicans,  to  whom  by 
will  he  bequeathed  the  fine  park  and  mansion,  but  only  after 
the  lifetime  of  his  niece,  Miss  Helen  Gulson.  She,  with  much 
generosity,  would  not  wait-for  the  fulfilment  of  his  wishes,  but 
started  to  carry  them  at  once  into  effect.  The  mansion  became 
a  temporary  priory  while  a  new  priory  was  being  built  close 
at  hand,  and  a  noble  college  chapel,  no  mean  follower  in  the 
traditions  of  Catholic  greatness.  Hither  the  community  moved 
on  25  August  1898;  and  to  the  old  mansion  was  transferred 
the  old  school  from  Hinckley,  which,  with  many  breaks  in  its 
continuity,  could  yet  claim  some  sort  of  connection  through 
Carshalton  with  the  older  Bornhem.  Hawkesyard  Priory 
itself,  under  the  dedication  of  S.  Thomas  Aquinas,  became  the 
house  of  studies  of  the  Province,  where  its  open  park  and 
grounds,  and  the  peaceful  surroundings  of  English  country 
life,  reproduced  unconsciously  the  pre-Reformation  conditions 
of  King's  Langley.  Miss  Gulson  herself  lived  in  a  little  red 
cottage  on  the  estate,  and,  dying  on  All  Souls'  Day,  1910, 
endowed  the  priory  of  her  choice  with  a  truly  mediaeval 
munificence. 

After  Hawkesyard  followed  Pendleton,  built  also  through 
the  generosity  of  a  single  benefactor.  In  the  busiest  com- 
mercial town  in  England,  thoug'h  almost  on  the  very  fringe  of 
its  quickly  expanding  circumference,  a  priory  dedicated  to 
S.  Sebastian  has  been  built  as  a  thank  offering'  for  the  gift  of 
faith  by  Andre  S.  Raffalovich.  This  was  in  1898.  The  church 
was  solemnly  opened  and  consecrated  on  19  January,  1901. 
To  it  is  attached  a  parish,  but  the  neighbourhood  is  so  studded 
with  Catholic  churches,  and  the  whole  country  is  so  consider- 
ably Catholic  in  the  proportion  of  its  inhabitants,  that  the 
priory  forms  a  fine  preaching  centre,  and  as  such  gives  ample 
opportunity  for  the  cultivation  of  Dominican  ideals.  The 
mention  of  such  parish  houses  as  these  suggest  that  there  is 
this  advantage  to  the  religious  themselves  in  the  employment 
of  religious  in  parochial  life,  that  the  Order  is  kept  in  touch 
with  popular  life.  It  is  the  constantly  repeated  accusation 
against  the  religious  Orders  abroad  that  they  stand  so  far  out 
of  the  whole  stream  of  existence  that  their  attitude,  mentally 
as  well  as  physically,  is  one  of  aloofness,  and  the  consequent 
impression  on  the  people  is  that  monks  and  nuns  are  out  of 
common  feeling  with  their  generation,  are  useless,  and  become 
unpopular.  Here  in  England  the  Dominicans,  like  the  other 
friars  and  religious,  know  as  much  about  the  lives  of  the 
people,  poor  and  rich,  as  do  the  secular  clergy.  They  are 
brought  into  an  equally  intimate  acquaintance  with  ordinary 


2o8  XT  be  Bngiisb  Dominicans 

folk,  share  their  sorrows,  relieve  their  necessities,  comfort 
their  anxieties,  enter  as  closely  as  possible  into  the  lives  of 
their  Catholic  neighbours. 

A  final  touch  was  given  to  the  work  of  the  Province  when 
Grenada,  one  of  the  Windward  islands,  was  handed  over  to  the 
care  of  the  English  Dominicans  as  a  field  for  foreign  mis- 
sionary enterprise.  Known  early  as  Conception  Island,  it  had 
been  amply  evangelized  by  French  priests,  who  established  a 
very  excellent  knowledge  and  spirit  of  faith  among  the  black 
inhabitants.  But  through  scarcity  of  priests  the  people  had 
little  opportunity  of  attending  their  religious  duties.  The 
churches  were  few  and  dilapidated,  and  the  schools  wholly 
inadequate,  though  the  religious  instruction  was  admirable. 
Two  fathers  had  already  for  some  years  been  labouring  in 
Trinidad,  and  these,  reinforced  by  another  band  from  England, 
took  over  the  spiritual  direction  of  the  island.  At  once  a  new 
spirit  was  introduced,  and  the  people  were  grateful  for  the 
change.  Churches  were  rebuilt,  schools  multiplied,  religious 
instruction  reorganized,  and  little  chapels  of  ease  set  up  in 
far  distant  places  where  at  least  occasionally  the  older  folks 
could  attend  to  receive  the  sacraments  and  to  hear  Mass. 
The  Catholic  population  is  estimated  at  39,000,  and  the  priests 
labouring  there  number  eleven,  so  that  it  is  clear  that  there 
is  plenty  of  work  for  all.  The  climate  on  the  whole  is  good, 
the  people  easy  to  get  on  with,  and  the  work  encouraging  in 
the  ample  return  of  gratitude  and  goodness  made  by  the 
inhabitants. 

This  has  seemed  to  round  off  the  variety  of  work  of  the 
English  Province.  Houses,  parishes,  foreign  missions,  preach- 
ing, the  writing  of  books,  a  school,  a  second  Order  convent, 
afford  ample  opportunities  for  the  accomplishment  of  the  ideals 
of  Dominican  life.  But  there  is  one  further  development  which 
recent  times  have  added  to  the  fullness  of  the  older  principles 
of  S.  Dominic,  this  has  been  the  wonderful  growth  of  the 
religious  Tertiary  convents. 

To  the  mediaeval  world  the  Third  Order,  as  it  was  called, 
was  not  considered  to  belong  to  any  particular  religious  Order. ' 
It  was  an  Order  by  itself.  It  had  sprung  up  into  existence 
out  of  a  curious  combination  of  circumstances ;  and  was  not 
a  definite  religious  institute  sprung  from  a  single  founder  and 
wearing  a  determined  habit.  It  was  a  Third  Order  precisely 
because  it  was  neither  of  monks  nor  canons,  and  was  earlier 
than  the  friars.  It  began  as  a  loose  organization  of  laymen, 
who  set  themselves  to  preach  the  reformation  of  morals.  The 
corruption  and  ignorance  of  the  clergy,  and  their  abandon- 
ment of  their  duty  of  preaching,  forced  religious-minded  men 
and  women  to  speak   publicly  of  what  the   priesthood   and 

1  Cf.  Chapter  V,  note  1. 


Uhc  TRestoratton  209 

episcopacy  neglected  publicly  to  preach.  Yet,  because  they 
were  laymen,  that  is,  not  properly  trained  with  any  deep 
knowledge  of  theology,  nor  much  acquaintance  with  the 
details  of  doctrine,  their  very  earnestness  drove  them  astray. 
Many  of  them  drifted  off  into  curious  heresies,  and,  as  a 
result,  the  organization,  such  as  it  was,  was  suppressed  by 
papal  authority,  and  forbidden  to  preach.  For  a  number  of 
years  the  bulk  of  them  remained  in  disorder,  some  obeying-, 
most  defying  the  Pope,  till  Innocent  III,  whose  original  and 
masterful  mind  sought  all  Christendom  over  for  every  possible 
ally  in  the  development  of  the  Catholic  faith,  thought  out  a 
plan  for  reconciliation.  He  formed  out  of  this  wandering  and 
suspected  brotherhood  one  branch  that,  as  religious,  was  to 
be  settled  in  monasteries,  quiet  monks  and  contemplatives ; 
and  another  that  still  remained  in  its  first  fashion  living  its 
normal  secular  life,  trading  or  serving  or  ruling,  yet  willing, 
whenever  need  was,  to  leave  home  and  preach.  Only  to  insure 
that  there  should  be  no  further  fear  of  heterodoxy  they  were 
to  preach  not  doctrine,  but  morals,  to  preach  "penance"  or 
"  penitence,"  as  the  expression  then  was  in  Canon  Law.  This 
rehabilitated  Order,  lay,  not  living  in  community,  nor  indeed 
in  any  religious  house,  destined  for  the  work  of  preaching, 
yet  in  the  pauses  of  such  work  reverting  to  its  homely  life  and 
family  obligations,  was  the  Third  Order  which  owed  its 
recognition  and  its  existence  to  Pope  Innocent  III. 

Then  later,  as  it  settled  in  the  villages  of  Italy,  it  drifted 
off  into  the  quarters  of  the  towns,  and  found  itself  sheltering 
under  the  shadow  of  a  church.  It,  by  natural  affinity,  gravi- 
tated to  the  churches  of  religious  Orders,  and  gradually  learnt 
to  follow  the  fashion  of  the  particular  community  near  where 
it  settled.  Out  of  this  mass  grew  the  Franciscan  Order,  which 
found  itself  organized  by  Popes  and  Cardinals  against  the 
wish  of  its  founder.  The  Dominican  Master-General  of  1281, 
Munio  of  Zamora,  endeavoured  to  organize  the  Tertius  Ordo 
by  putting  it  under  the  direction  of  the  Preaching  Friars;  the 
reigning  Pontiff,  Nicholas  IV,  a  Franciscan,  retorted  by  a 
bull  attaching  it  in  1289  to  his  own  religious  brethren.  But 
independently  of  both  it  went  on  its  peculiar  path,  taking 
shape  and  form  and  habit  from  its  neighbouring  religious, 
becoming  Dominican  or  Franciscan  or  Augustinian  or  Servite, 
as  the  Church  might  be  where  it  happened  to  settle. 

The  Dominican  branch  was  further  developed  by  its 
amalgamation  with  a  crusading  militia  that  had  fought  for 
the  Church  in  the  Albigensian  wars,  and  had  fallen  under 
the  influence  of  S.  Dominic.  Under  the  name  of  the  Militia 
of  Jesus  Christ,  Honorius  III  had  commended  it  to  Jordan  of 
Saxony,  the  second  Master-General,  through  whose  influence 
a  definite  rule  seems  to  have  been  given  it,  which  bound  it  in 
habit  as  well  as  in  spirit  to  the  Preaching  Friars.     Both  the 

p 


210  Zftc  Bnglisb  Dominicans 

Tertius  Ordo  and  the  Militia  took  up  also  the  habit  of  black 
and  white. 

A  third  stream  of  influence  were  the  nuns,  reformed  or 
founded  by  S.  Dominic.  Those  established  at  Prouille  were 
given  a  rule  by  the  Holy  Founder,  which  in  turn  was  passed 
on  to  the  nuns  of  S.  Sisto,  and  for  them  approved  by  the 
Sovereign  Pontiff.  This  rule  was  officially  entitled  the  rule  of 
the  Sisters  of  S.  Sisto  de  Penitentia,  and  the  addition  of  that 
last  phrase,  which  was  the  technical  expression  for  the  Terthis 
Ordo  (because  allowed  only  to  preach  "penance  "),  shows  that 
Prouille,  too,  was  looked  upon  as  part  of  the  same  movement. 
Sisters  then,  Militia,  and  Terthis  Ordo  all  combined  to  make 
the  Dominican  Tertiary. 

In  England,  before  the  Reformation,  there  are  a  few  traces 
of  them.  There  is  an  old  petition  said  to  have  been  addressed 
to  Henry  IV  protesting  against  the  quantity  of  people  who 
were  entering  the  fraternities  of  the  friars ;  but  there  is  very 
little  positive  evidence  of  the  early  Tertiaries.  It  certainly 
appears  that  Edward  I,  Edward  II,  and  Richard  II  must  have 
been  counted  among  the  Dominicans;  while  Queen  Eleanor 
herself  in  1280  was  solemnly  admitted  by  the  Master-General 
to  participate  in  the  good  works  of  the  Order,  the  diploma 
being  copied  carefully  into  the  treasury  receipts  of  the  Crown.1 
Further,  it  is  clear  that  it  is  to  the  English  Province  that  the 
Queen  is  affiliated,  for  it  is  especially  noted  how  at  her  death 
every  English  Dominican  shall  be  obliged  to  say  Mass  for  her 
soul,  if  he  be  a  priest,  and  if  not  a  priest  then  the  Suffrages 
commonly  accounted  corresponding  to  the  Mass.  Again,  in 
1352,  on  1  June  Sir  Henry  Bohun  is  received  into  the  fraternity 
of  the  Order  by  Master-General  Simon;*  while  in  1395  it  is 
the  Provincial,  Thomas  Palmer,  who  admits  Agnes  Coombe 
to  a  share  in  the  good  works  of  the  English  Dominicans,3  and 
John  Redisdale,  Provincial,  aggregates  Richard  Benton,  Prior 
of  the  Charterhouse  at  Beauvale  in  Nottingham,  to  the  Order 
on  7  February  1423. 4  In  this  last  case  it  is  clear  that  there  is 
no  question  of  affiliation,  but  only  of  participation  in  the  good 
works  of  the  Order.  A  few  references  in  wills  almost  com- 
plete all  we  know  about  mediaeval  English  Tertiaries.  John 
Lydford,  Archdeacon  of  Totnes,  leaves  ops.  on  12  March 
1407  to  the  Dominicans  of  Exeter,  because  he  has  been  ad- 
mitted into  that  Order; "  in  1430  William  Shepper,  innkeeper, 
leaves  6s.  8d.  to  the  Dominicans  of  London,  "where  I  am  a 
Brother";6  in   1438  Nicholas  Grave,  Rector  of  S.  Andrew's, 

1  P.R.O.  Lib.  B  in  Thes.  Cur.  Recep.  Scac,  fol.  i7b. 

2  P.R.O.  Charters  of  Dxichy  of  Lancaster,  Box  A,  No.  214. 

3  B.M.  Cotton  MSS.,  Galba,  E.  XI,  fol.  1. 

4  P.R.O.  Court  of  Augmentations,  Cartae  B,  96. 

5  Hingis,  Register  of  Edmxaid  Stafford,  Bishop  of  Exeter. 
c  Wills,  P.C.C.,  15  Luffenan. 


Zbe  ttestcvzticn  211 

Cornbill,  leaves  20c  to  die  same  community,    "to  whose 

'.-.:■.■■  \;-.    .     '-- :  -     :_"_     \-    '.'r--.-.-~       :'.'.-■■'. 

of  this  affiliation  :    ;  AL«o  I  bequeath  to  tt.  ^reacbers 

;    -'  -  -  -        .      .  - 

ternrty,"1  while  there  is  the  entry  of  Blessed  Adrian  Fortescoe 
in  bis  anroiint  book,  under  date  Jtdy   15  S    ea  to  the 

Black  Friars  of  Oxford  to  be  of  their  Fraternrr 


written  for  three  women  Tct 


- 


212  XTbe  Bnglisb  Dominicans 

house.  At  last,  however,  on  1 1  June  1844,  a  solemn  clothing 
took  place  of  the  three  young  sisters  and  Mother  Margaret 
herself,  and  on  8  December  1845  they  were  professed,  first 
Mother  Margaret  making  her  profession  to  Fr.  Dominic 
Aylward,  who  represented  the  Dominican  Provincial,  and 
then  the  other  sisters  making  theirs  to  her  "  Prioress  of  the 
Community  of  S.  Catharine  of  Sienna  of  Coventry."  For  six 
weeks  the  community,  which  in  June  of  1846  had  added 
another  novice  and  a  postulant  to  its  number,  stayed  with 
the  Dominican  nuns  of  the  Second  Order  then  at  Atherstone 
(now  at  Carisbrooke),  and  then  set  off  for  Clifton,  whither 
had  moved  Bishop  Ullathorne  (who  as  new  Vicar-Apostolic 
of  the  western  district  had  left  Coventry  for  the  South-West 
of  England).  Thence  again  they  adjourned  to  Bristol.  By  this 
time  they  had  undertaken  the  Little  Office  of  Our  Lady  in 
Latin,  and  were  receiving  such  frequent  postulants  that  their 
hopes  of  final  establishment  became  more  and  more  certain. 
But  even  yet  Mother  Margaret  felt  that  they  had  not  found 
their  settled  abode,  though  such  a  sense  of  restlessness 
seemed  hardly  grateful  after  the  amazing  kindness  of  God.  In 
February  1847  Bishop  Ullathorne  was  formally  appointed  by 
the  Master-General  to  be  head  of  the  sisters  and  his  Vicar 
over  all  future  convents,  and  the  General  also  desired  Mother 
Margaret  to  consider  herself  the  Superioress  of  all  new  houses 
of  Tertiaries  founded  under  the  direction  of  the  Bishop.  She 
made  several  tentative  foundations  as  at  Bridgewater  and 
Longton;  but  these  were  given  up,  and  even  the  fine  convent 
she  had  established  at  Clifton  was  renounced  for  a  greater 
project,  where  she  no  longer  felt  any  of  that  older  pain  of 
unrest,  and  where  eventually  her  own  body  was  to  lie  in' 
peace  as  at  the  centre  foundation  of  her  real  life's  work. 
Indeed  Stone,  whither  she  moved  in  1852,  has  given  its 
name  to  the  whole  congregation  that  has  grown  out  of  her 
work.  Meanwhile,  Pere  Jandel,  the  new  Master-General, 
arrived  in  England  on  a  visit  to  the  Order,  and  from  Wood- 
chester  went  over  to  Clifton,  where  he  was  received  with  full 
solemnities  by  the  community.  Thence  proceeding  to  Hinck- 
ley, he  drew  up  with  the  Provincial  a  petition  to  the  Holy  See 
in  his  name  and  in  that  of  the  Bishop  of  Birmingham  (whither 
Bishop  Ullathorne  had  been  translated  on  the  re-establish- 
ment of  the  hierarchy  in  1850)  asking  for  a  papal  confirma- 
tion of  the  new  institute.  This  was  granted  on  31  August 
1851.  Before  this,  on  31  December  1850,  the  whole  com- 
munity had  finally  taken  on  the  full  Dominican  habit,  which 
they  were  never  after  to  relinquish.  By  1853  the  constitutions 
were  finally  drawn  up  and  approved,  consisting  almost  exclu- 
sively of  passages  from  the  magnificent  Constitutions  of 
the  First  Order,  themselves  drawn  out  in  order  by  S.  Ray- 
mund  of  Pennafort.     These  English  adaptations,  which  were 


Xlbe  IRestoration  213 

never  very  different  from  the  older  examples,  have  proved  of 
exceeding  value,  and  have  been  adapted  not  only  by  congrega- 
tions of  Tertiaries  in  English-speaking  lands,  as  California, 
the  United  States,  Australia,  South  Africa,  but  also  in  Chili 
and  Germany,  and  thus  has  the  sanction  of  the  Order  been 
confirmed  by  "  the  sincerest  form  of  flattery."  This  was  com- 
pleted by  an  official  approbation  of  the  Holy  See  in  1877. 
The  little  company  that  Mother  Margaret  founded  has  on  all 
sides  shot  out  its  branches  of  work  and  labour.  Mother 
Francis  Raphael  Drane,  her  second  successor,  gave  the  con- 
gregation an  immense  reputation  by  her  extraordinary  genius 
of  mind  and  soul,  and  Mother  Rose  Columba  Adams,  another 
of  Mother  Margaret's  favourite  daughters,  carried  over  beyond 
the  seas,  into  the  new  continent  of  Australia,  the  zeal,  energy, 
faith,  courage,  and  general  desire  for  teaching  the  Gospel 
which  the  Mother  had  so  generously  shown  and  practised. 

After  this  huge  effort  of  Mother  Margaret,  whose  adven- 
tures must  be  read  in  the  life  of  her  composed  by  Mother 
Drane,  the  work  was  made  easier  for  others  to  follow.  Under 
the  direct  impulse  of  the  Dominican  Fathers  of  Woodchester, 
Mother  Theresa  Matthews  built  up  the  congregation  of 
S.  Rose  at  Stroud,  begun  in  1862,  solemnly  approved  by  the 
Holy  See  in  1896;  while  in  Harrow  Mother  Bathurst  in- 
augurated the  congregation  of  Our  Lady  of  the  Rosary.  Other 
congregations  grew  up,  some  by  separation  from  a  foreign 
branch,  as  did  the  nuns  of  Portobello  Road  in  West  London, 
or  those  of  West  Grinstead,  some  starting  for  themselves 
alone,  and  gradually  forming  into  new  works  and  for  new 
purposes.  Not  all  these  are  finally  approved,  but  all  are  en- 
deavouring to  find  fresh  outlets  for  that  burning  spirit  of 
apostolic  zeal  which  S.  Dominic  himself  long  strove  to  prac- 
tise, and  finally  bequeathed  to  his  children. 

Of  the  large  number  of  Dominican  lay  Tertiaries  in  England 
it  is  not  possible  to  speak;  the  strict  conditions  required  for 
membership,  for  it  is  a  real  Order  and  no  mere  confraternity, 
must  necessarily  and  rightly  prevent  any  very  extensive  popu- 
larity. Popularity  in  such  a  case  would  mean  an  emptying  of 
whatever  really  was  of  value.  Consequently,  there  has  been 
little  attempt  to  organize  these  children  of  S.  Dominic,  though 
it  is  possible  that  coming  years  will  see  a  development  of 
Tertiary  life  as  an  aid  in  the  task  of  instruction,  which  the 
increasing  multiplication  of  converts  will  necessitate  in 
England. 

But  while  in  this  way  the  Third  Order,  in  its  various  forms, 
was  spreading  in  the  English  Province,  the  fathers  them- 
selves were  taking  a  larger  place,  too,  in  English  Catholic 
life.  Woodchester  itself  became  the  centre  of  much  literary 
work,  for  around  picturesque  church  and  priory,  in  the  beauti- 
ful Stroud  valley,  and  along  the  chalk  hills  of  the  Cotswolds, 


214  ftbe  English  Dominicans 

were  gathered  families  of  the  Oxford  convert  movement.  From 
Leicester  Father  Caestryck,  a  Belgian  Dominican  who  had 
come  to  help  his  English  brethren,  was  evangelizing  the 
neighbouring  villages  and  bringing  into  the  Church  Ambrose 
Phillips  de  Lisle.  The  work  of  missions  to  Catholics  was  also 
developing  under  the  zealous  care  of  Fr.  Bertrand  Wilber- 
force,  Fr.  Pius  Cavanagh,  Fr.  Albert  Buckler,  and  Fr.  John 
Procter,  to  name  only  the  dead.  Others,  too,  helped  in  the 
general  advancement  of  the  Church,  dictating  a  niceness  in 
the  choral  chaunt,  in  the  artistic  refinement  of  decoration,  and 
in  the  more  splendid  and  more  worthily  built  churches  dedi- 
cated to  the  service  of  the  Church. 

The  old  troubles  were  passing,  had  passed,  and  out  of  the 
fire,  newborn,  came  the  English  Province  of  S.  Dominic. 

Almost  seven  hundred  years  have  come  and  gone  since  the 
first  coming  to  England  of  the  friars,  a  band  of  thirteen, 
unknown,  strange,  until  one  had  preached  in  place  of  Cardinal 
Stephen  Langton  on  the  festival  of  the  Transfiguration  in  the 
Cathedral  of  Canterbury.  The  sermon  of  the  friar,  whether 
by  its  eloquence  or  its  earnestness,  had  touched  the  Primate, 
so  that  ever  after  he  was  their  father  and  friend.  Indeed,  the 
Friars  Preachers  had  need  of  such  protection,  for  their  ways 
were  often  blocked  by  the  older  Orders  and  by  the  action  of 
many  of  the  priests,  who  were  afraid  of  these  new  religious 
without  enclosure  or  stability  in  the  monastic  meaning  of  the 
phrase.  Jealousy  was  by  no  means  the  only  motive  of  opposi- 
tion ;  but  many  stood  by  them  in  all  their  troubles,  and  proved 
loyal  friends.  Later  came  royal  support,  which  was  all- 
powerful  while  it  lasted ;  and  there  was  hardly  a  priory  all 
England  through  that  did  not  look  to  one  king  or  another  as 
founder  or  munificent  benefactor.  Men  as  dissimilar  as 
Hubert  de  Burgh  and  Peter  des  Roches,  as  Simon  de  Montfort 
and  Piers  Gaveston,  as  Richard  II  and  Henry  IV,  turned  to 
them  for  counsel  and  for  the  ghostly  direction  of  their  souls. 
From  de  Burgh,  by  will,  they  inherited  Whitehall,  from  de 
Montfort  the  Priory  of  Leicester,  from  Gaveston's  memory 
the  richest  friary  in  England,  their  noviciate  house  at  King's 
Langley.  Edward  II  loved  them  and  confessed  to  them; 
while  Thomas  of  Lancaster,  in  revolt  against  Edward,  when 
beheaded  by  royal  orders  after  the  battle  of  Boroughbridge, 
had  his  last  hours  comforted  by  a  Blackfriar.  Peter  des  Roches 
of  Winchester,  a  scandalous  prelate  of  foreign  birth  and 
sympathies,  was  equalled,  indeed,  surpassed,  in  devotion  to 
the  Order  by  Robert  Grosseteste,  learned,  pious,  English,  the 
famous  professor  of  Oxford  and  Bishop  of  Lincoln.  Henry  III 
and  his  finer  son  and  successor,  Edward  I,  were  the  first 
Plantagenets  when  the  Dominicans  came,  and  till  that  greatest 
of  English  royal  houses  fell  in  the  murder  of  their  last  repre- 


n 


u 

Q     3 

5 


£ 


H 

O       fe 

C     ° 


~^^"~™^l 

::HHH 

"■■ 

:"8H 

-WM 

#.- 

-MM 

-WM 

^i**^00/0fmW 

[To  face  p.  214 


Ube  IRestoration  215 

sentative,  it  was  in  the  Order  of  S.  Dominic  that  it  found  its 
spiritual  help.  The  house  of  Lancaster,  crafty,  unstable, 
usurping",  turned  to  Carmelites  and  Franciscans,  the  house  of 
York  and  Tudor  to  the  secular  priesthood;  but  the  wildest, 
fiercest,  noblest  of  all  the  king's  since  the  Normans,  found  in 
the  brethren  of  S.  Thomas  Aquinas  their  guides,  philosophers, 
and  friends. 

Following  the  design  of  their  founder,  the  first  English 
priory  was  established  by  the  friars  at  Oxford,  where  their 
arrival  was  immediately  followed  by  the  opening  of  schools 
for  philosophy  and  theology.  Here  by  opposition  they  stimu- 
lated Walter  of  Merton  to  adopt  the  college  system,  and  thus 
to  introduce  it  to  the  University,  and  were  of  such  influence 
that  for  a  whole  generation  all  public  and  official  disputations 
and  acts  were  carried  on  within  their  walls.  Then  when  the 
University  learnt  naturally  to  resent  this  and  to  desire  that 
these  should  be  transferred  to  the  University  church  of  S. 
Mary's,  the  long  struggle  that  ensued,  in  which  King  and 
Pope  and  Primate  and  Parliament  were  successively  appealed 
to,  kept  the  Preaching  Friars  at  least  before  public  notice. 
A  controversy  meant  always  that  the  English  Dominicans 
were  being  kept  up  to  the  fighting  pitch  of  perfect  condition. 
Earlier  than  this  the  friars  had  come  into  collision  with  the 
older  professors  over  the  new  Thomistic  theology,  which  was 
considered  frankly  pagan  as  the  creation  of  Aristotle.  Peckham 
of  Canterbury,  an  old  Oxford  professor,  appealed  to  Pope  and 
Cardinals,  pamphlets  were  published  and  counter-attacked, 
schools  were  invaded,  Provincials  hotly  pursued.  In  the  end 
S.  Thomas  conquered,  and  took  eventually  almost  as  hardened 
a  form  of  absolute  dominion  as  he  had  found  it  himself  so 
difficult  to  attack.  First  then  over  the  philosophic  interpreta- 
tion of  the  Faith,  secondly,  over  the  right  of  the  friars  to 
teach  and  the  privileges  which  their  teaching  had  gained  for 
them,  their  stay  in  Oxford  was  compounded  largely  of  disputa- 
tion. 

But  having  by  this  means  acquired  a  place  in  the  English 
intellectual  world,  having  defended  their  position  in  the  centre 
of  English  life,  they  again  found  themselves  attacked  because 
of  their  very  English  customs  and  name.  A  third  long  struggle 
followed,  this  time  between  the  Provincial  and  the  Master- 
General  in  Rome ;  but  whereas  elsewhere  in  Christendom  the 
central  authority  was  striving  to  bring  back  the  Order  to  its 
pristine  observance,  in  England  it  was  endeavouring  to  miti- 
gate the  severity  of  the  rule.  When  eventually  a  board  of 
judges  was  appointed  by  the  General  to  sit  on  the  administra- 
tion of  the  Province,  and  was  constituted  so  unfairly  that  the 
judge  was  to  succeed  to  the  Provincialate  if  he  could  prove 
the  Provincial  to  have  been  at  fault,  the  chief  charges  made 
were   that  that  official   had  made  slighting:   remarks    about 


216  Uhc  Englisb  Dominicans 

Roman  authority,  and  had  been  too  drastic  and  harsh  in 
dealing-  with  those  under  his  charge. 

No  wonder  the  Provincial  was  unseated  and  his  place  occu- 
pied by  his  judge.  But  in  the  end,  after  the  long  conflict,  in 
which  the  English  never  faltered  in  their  intention  of  forcing 
all  foreign  friars  in  Oxford  and  elsewhere  within  the  Province 
limits  to  obey  the  constitutions  and  to  follow  the  rule  in  its 
letter,  and  had  for  that  reason  refused  to  recognize  the  dis- 
pensations granted  too  easily  from  Rome,  the  Master- General 
handsomely  acknowledged  that  he  had  misunderstood  the 
attitude  of  the  English  friars,  and  that  their  method  for  the 
upkeep  of  religious  observance  was  at  least  as  valid  as  his 
own.  But  with  the  triumph  of  its  success  the  English  Pro- 
vince sank  to  its  decline.  So  long  as  there  were  enemies  of 
one  kind  or  another,  it  could  keep  stiffened  in  its  energy  and 
dared  not  relax  its  strength;  but  since  one  by  one  its 
problems  were  solved  it  seemed  to  have  lost  all  power  of  self- 
development,  wilted,  and  grown  small.  Just  for  a  while  the 
growing  force  of  Wycliffism  and  Lollardy  roused  to  energy  the 
faltering  genius  of  the  Province ;  then  the  State  interfered,  sup- 
pressed heresy  by  force  of  arms,  removed  the  opposition,  and 
indirectly  occasioned  the  English  friars  to  relapse  into  their 
sleep  again. 

With  the  dawn  of  the  Reformation,  once  more  the  Preaching 
Friars  were  recalled  to  their  purpose  and  their  life.  Several 
members  of  the  Order,  the  Priors  of  Cambridge,  Norwich, 
Newcastle,  boldly  attacked  the  new-fangled  faith,  though  they 
were  quickly  silenced  by  Henry's  despotic  government.  Had 
they  been  left  to  themselves  it  would  seem  as  though  they 
could  have  rallied  and  lived.  But  persecution  broke  out  in  the 
way  first  of  suppression,  then  with  all  the  bloody  engines  of 
despotic  murder.  Hunted  and  harried,  banished  or  fleeing  for 
safety  over  sea,  the  various  little  groups  of  friars  were  hope- 
lessly dispersed.  Beyond  the  fitful  gleams  of  Mary's  reign 
there  came  only  the  settled  gloom  of  the  long  penal  night. 
From  1570  to  1622  the  list  of  organized  superiors  of  the 
English  friars  is  wanting,  though  it  is  not  altogether  clear  or 
certain  whether  from  the  death  of  Heskyns  to  the  nomination 
of  Middleton  there  were  any  appointed.  There  were  certainly 
Dominicans  in  England,  though  their  method  of  government 
we  do  not  know. 

Then  just  as  the  few  scattered  remnants  were  ageing,  and 
the  hoped  for  respite  under  James  I  and  Charles  I  seemed  to 
be  passing  without  any  relief  to  the  Dominicans  in  England, 
came  the  call  of  Philip  Howard.  In  spite  of  the  opposition  of 
his  family,  of  which  the  echoes  reached  John  Evelyn  and 
Samuel  Pepys,  he  persevered  in  his  vocation  and  sought  to 
safeguard  the  future  succession  by  establishing  abroad  a 
priory  for  regular  observance  to  be  a  feeding  centre  for  the 


XTbe  IRestoration  217 

English  mission,  a  convent  of  contemplative  English  Domini- 
can nuns,  and  a  school  for  boys.  Under  his  influence  and 
tolerant  personal  rule,  the  Province  grew  in  numbers,  sent 
missionaries  to  evangelize  and  keep  alive  at  home  the  fire  of 
Faith,  established  itself  in  Louvain  and  Antwerp.  Fr.  Thomas 
himself,  called  to  the  Cardinalate,  continued  his  fatherly 
interest  in  the  Province,  and  thereby  secured  for  it  the  right 
to  have  its  Provincials,  instead  of  Vicars  of  the  General,  in 
regular  form.  Within  forty  years  of  his  death  the  proper 
sequence  of  Provincial  Chapters  begins. 

But  the  French  Revolution  broke  up  all  the  Belgian  estab- 
lishments. Even  at  home  there  seemed  prospect  of  financial 
ruin,  and  Carshalton,  which  had  been  furnished  at  enormous 
expense  as  a  refuge  for  the  boys  from  Bornhem,  seemed 
destined  to  drag  down  the  Province  with  it  to  bankruptcy. 
Then  a  new  proposal,  intended  in  all  good  faith,  to  help  the 
English  fathers  to  assured  success,  seemed  to  threaten  what 
little  stability  and  continuity  yet  remained.  Prominent  fathers 
who  had  held  high  office  joined  the  new  Province  of  the  United 
States,  and  the  enforced  union  of  the  two  Provinces  (almost  at 
the  moment  when  the  States  were  endeavouring  to  free  them- 
selves from  a  national  union  with  England)  was  considered 
favourably  by  the  rulers  of  the  Church  and  of  the  Order. 
Despite  the  vehement  protests  of  the  Provincial,  only  Divine 
interposition,  as  it,  indeed,  seemed  to  the  English  friars,  saved 
them.  On  the  eve  of  the  day  on  which  the  decree  of  the  Sacred 
Congregation  was  to  be  signed,  the  Cardinal  in  charge  was 
struck  down  by  a  fatal  illness  and  the  Master-General  was 
seized  with  a  fit  of  apoplexy.  The  new  Cardinal-Prefect  and 
the  interim-Vicar  were  both  hostile  to  the  project,  and  nothing 
further  was  ever  done. 

But  the  harassing  anxiety  of  this  seemed  of  itself  sufficient 
to  break  the  English  fathers.  At  the  Provincial  Chapter  of 
1810  only  one  father  refused  to  lose  hope,  and  pledged  him- 
self to  open  a  school  of  postulants,  and  single-handed  to  insure 
the  Province  of  continued  existence.  His  one  spirit  re-animated 
the  drooping  faith  of  the  rest.  A  few  years  later  and  the  old 
spirit  of  despair  had  re-entered  into  the  hearts  of  all.  There 
were  fewer  Dominicans  than  even  there  had  been  before 
Cardinal  Howard  took  it  in  hand  to  open  Bornhem.  The 
debate  as  to  whether  they  should  continue  or  not  was  still  in 
progress  when  the  fathers  were  interrupted  by  the  arrival  of 
Mr.  Leigh  with  his  offer  of  Woodchester.  It  came  at  a  crucial 
moment,  and  it  saved  the  Province. 

Woodchester  meant  assured  life  and  a  generous  benefactor. 
Slowly,  for  ten  years  the  Province  rested.  Then  came  the 
London  and  Newcastle  priories,  Leicester  reorganized  as  a 
priory,  the  little  missions  of  Leicestershire  begun  and  aban- 


218  Uhc  Bug lisb  Dominicans 

doned,  the  permanent  mission  at  Stroud,  the  acceptance  and 
surrender  of  Littlehampton. 

Again  a  pause,  then  Hawkesyard,  Pendleton,  and  the 
foreign  mission  of  Grenada.1 

In  the  meanwhile  the  nuns,  driven  out  of  Belgium  by  the 
Revolution,  sought  refuge,  first  in  London,  then  at  Hartpury 
Court,  then  Atherstone,  Hurst  Green,  and  finally  at  Caris- 
brooke ;  while  under  their  encouragement  and  the  inspiration 
of  Mother  Margaret  Hallahan  and  Bishop  Ullathorne,  the 
conventual  Tertiaries  restored  the  habit  of  S.  Dominic  to  the 
streets  and  lanes  of  England. 

The  boys'  school,  after  a  tragic  history  of  three  hundred 
years,  interrupted,  discontinued,  revived,  has  settled  at 
Hawkesyard  under  the  shadow  of  the  Priory,  in  the  old 
mansion  of  the  Spodes. 

Of  the  living  who  shall  speak?  Or  of  the  future  who  dare 
prophesy?  With  its  memory  of  the  past,  its  affection  for  the 
present,  and  its  hopes  for  the  future-to-be,  the  story  of  the 
English  Province  of  the  Order  of  S.  Dominic  shall  continue; 
for  not  in  utter  nothingness  nor  in  entire  forgetfulness  but 
trailing  clouds  of  glory  has  it  come. 

1  In  1918  the  English  Province  accepted  the  charge  of  missionary 
districts  in  the  Transvaal  and  in  Natal,  and  have  at  home  bought  land 
in  Oxford,  where  it  is  hoped  one  day  to  open  a  large  priory. 


APPENDIX  I 

PROVINCIAL  PRIORS  AND  VICARS 
OF  THE  ENGLISH  DOMINICANS, 
1221-1919 

1221.   Gilbett  de  Fresney.     Sent  by  S.  Dominic  in  1221  to  found  the 
English  Province,  of  which  he  became  the  first  Provincial. 

{Ada,  i,   2;    Nicholas  Trivet,  O.P.,  Annales,  ed.   Hog, 
1845,  p.  209.) 
c.  1235.  Alard,  D.D.1    As  Provincial  he  received  a  letter  from  Bishop 
Robert  Grosseteste  in  1235.    He  was  formerly  Chancellor  of 
Oxford  in  1215. 

{Epistolae  R.   Grosseteste,  ed.  Luard,  pp.  59-63 ;  Wood's 
A  then.  Oxon.,  ii,  388.) 
c.  1242-54.  Matthew."1  In  1242,  when  Provincial,  he  received  a  letter 
from  Grosseteste.     He   was   absolved   from   office   by  the 
General  Chapter  of  the  Order  assembled  at  Buda  in  1254.3 
{Epist.  R.  Grosseteste,  pp.  304,  305;  Acta,  i,  71.) 
1254-61.  Simon,    D.D.  (Simon  de   Hinton.4)    Elected  in  1254,  and 
absolved    from    office    by   the    General    Chapter    held    at 
Barcelona   in    1261,    because   he    had    refused    to    receive 
foreign  students  at  Oxford. 
(Acta,i,  no,  in,  117.) 
1261-79.  Robert  of  Kilwardbj',t).'D.    Elected  in  1261.   Released  from 
office  in  May  1272,  but  re-elected  in  September.    Appointed 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury  by  Gregory  X,  November  1272. 
Created  Cardinal  Bishop  of  Porto  1279.    Died  at  Viterbo, 
Sept.  n,  1279.   Buried  in  the  Church  of  S.  Maria  ad  Gradus. 
{Acta,  i,  156,  165  ;  Trivet,  p.  278.) 
1273-8.    William  of  Southampto?i,  D.D.     Elected  in  1273.     Died  in 
Dec.  1278. 

(Patent  Roll,  6  Edw.  I,  m.  n;  "Provincials  of  Black- 
friars,"  by  C.  F.  R.  Palmer,  O.P.,  Archaeol.  Journ.,  xxxv, 
1878.     Reprint,  p.  7.) 

1  The  abbreviation  "  D.D."  in  this  paper  stands  for  the  title  "  Magister 
in  Sacra  Theologia,"  which  has  always  been  maintained  by  the  Domini- 
can Order.  Similarly  B.D.  is  used  for  S.T.  B.  A  title  peculiar  to  the 
Dominican  and  a  few  other  Orders  is  that  of ' '  Lector  in  Sacra  Theologia. " 
This  is  the  first  degree,  and  is  obtained  after  a  seven  years'  course  of 
philosophy  and  theology.  The  degree  of  Bachelor  is  conferred  after 
seven  years  of  teaching  in  a  theological  university,  and  the  Mastership 
after  a  further  course  of  seven  years. 

2  A  certain  Henry,  afterwards  Bishop  of  Culm,  in  the  lands  of  the 
Teutonic  Order,  is  said  to  have  been  English  Provincial  about  1240;  but 
this  is  due  to  an  error  first  made  by  Frederic  Shembek,  S.J.,  who  pub- 
lished a  book  on  the  Saints  of  Prussia,  at  Thorn,  in  1638. 

3  During  the  first  centuries  of  the  Order's  existence  the  Provincials 
seem  to  have  had  no  fixed  term  of  office,  but  continued  until  released 
from  their  charge  either  by  the  Master-General  or  the  General  Chapter. 

4  A.  G.  Little,  in  Engl.  Hist.  Review,  Oct.  1918,  added  an  appendix  to 
this  paper.  He  finds  Simon  of  Hinton,  Henton,  or  Heynton  (O.  Praed.) 
is  mentioned  as  a  writer  in  the  Durham  "Liber  Exemplorum,"  written 
between  1270  and  1279.  Bale,  who  makes  him  "  Provincial,"  dates  him 
1360,  a  century  too  late.  There  is  little  doubt  that  he  is  identical  with 
Simon,  Provincial  in  1256-61. 

219 


220  ube  ]£nc}li9b  Dominicans 

1279-82.  Hugh  of  Manchester,  D.D.  Elected  in  1279,  and  released 
by  chapter  of  Vienna,  1282.  He  was  ambassador  to  France 
in  1294,  and  still  living  in  1305. 

(Trivet,   pp.  302,   303;    Patent  Roll,    10  Edw.  I,   m.   10; 
Acta,  i,  220;  Langtoft,  Chron.,  ii,  205,  207.) 
1282-7.    William  of Hotham,  D.D.    Elected  in  1282.    Released  from 
office  and  sent  to  teach  at  Paris,  1287. 
(Acta,  i,  242.) 
1287-90.    William  of  Hereford.    Elected  in  1287.    Died  in  1290. 

{Acta,  i,    265;    Patent  Roll,    18  Edw.   I,   m.  18;    Littera 
Encyclica  Mag.  Gen.,  ed.  Reichert,  Rome,    1900,   pp.    150, 

I55-) 
1290-6.    William  of  Hotham,  D.D.    Re-elected  Sept.  8,  1290.    He  was 
the  favourite  minister  of  Edward  I,   and  in    1296  became 
Archbishop  of  Dublin.    Died  at  Dijon,  Aug.  27,  1299,  and 
buried  in  Blackfriars  Church,  London. 

(Trivet,  p.  364;  Diet,  of  National  Biography,  s.v.) 
1297-1304.  Thomas  de  Jorz,  D.D.  Elected  at  Oxford  in  1297. 
Absolved  from  office,  1304.  Created  Cardinal  Priest  of 
Sta  Sabina,  Dec.  1305.  Papal  legate  to  Italy  in  1310. 
Died  at  Grenoble,  Dec.  13,  1310,  and  buried  at  Blackfriars, 
Oxford. 

(Trivet,  p.  406;  Acta,  i,  322;  Diet,  of  Nat.  Biogr.,  s.v.) 
1304-6.  Robert  of  Bromyard,  D.D.    Elected  in  1304.     Released  from 
office  by  chapter  of  Paris  in  1306.    Living  in  1310. 
(Acta,  ii,  19;  Patent  Roll,  33  Edw.  I,  par.  2,  m.  15.) 
1306-12.  Nicholas  of  Stretton,  D.D.     Elected  in   1306.     Released  by 
chapter  of  Carcassone  in  1312,  and  sent  to  teach  at  Paris. 
Still  living  in  1325. 

(Acta,  ii,  60;    Patent  Roll,  30  Edw.  I,  m.  2S;    Palmer, 
pp.  15,  16.) 
1312-15.    William   of  Castreton,    D.D.     Appointed    by  the   Master- 
General     in     1 31 2.     Absolved    from    office   by   chapter    of 
Bologna,   1315. 

(Palmer,  p.  16,  "Ex  tabulario  Mag.  Gen.";  Acta,  ii,  84.) 
1315-17.  .  .  .    The  name  of  the  friar  who  was  elected  Provincial  in 
1 315  is  still  unknown.    He  was  released  from  office  by  the 
chapter  of  Pampeluna  in  1317. 
(Acta,  ii,  103.) 
1 317-27.  John  of  Bristol,  D.D.    Elected  in  1317.    Absolved  from  office 
by  the  chapter  of  Perpignan  in  1327. 

(Palmer,  pp.  17,  18,  "  Ex  tab.  Mag.  Gen.";  Acta,  ii,  171.) 
1327-36.  Simon  de  Bolaston,  D.D.    Elected  in  1327.    Absolved  by  the 
chapter  of  Bruges,   1336.    He  was  implicated  in  the  con- 
spiracy of  the  Earl  of  Kent   in  1330,  and   condemned  to 
perpetual  imprisonment,  but  regained  the  royal  favour. 
(Palmer,  p.  18;  Wilkins,  Concilia,  ii,  556;  Acta,  ii,  240.) 
1336.    William  de    Watisdene,    D.D.      Appointed    Vicar-General    of 
England  by  the  chapter  of  Bruges,  1336. 
(Acta,  ii,  241-2.) 
1336-9.  Richard  of  Winhley,  D.D.    Elected  in  1336.     Released  from 
office  by  the  chapter  of  Clermont  in  1339.    He  was  confessor 
to  Edward  III,  who  strongly  protested  against  his  deposi- 
tion.   He  was  living  in  1347. 

(Palmer,  pp.  18-20;    Close  Rolls,  14  Edw.  Ill,  m.  27  d.; 
Acta,  ii,  254.) 


Hppenbfj  5  221 

1339.  Hugh  Dutton,  D.D.  Appointed  Vicar-General  by  the  chapter 
of  Clermont  in  1339.  Elected  Provincial  the  same  or  the 
following'  year. 

{Acta,  ii,  258;  Palmer,  p.  21,  "Ex  tab.  Mag-.  Gen.") 
1346-1347.  Arnold  de   Strelley.     As    Provincial  presented  friars    to 
hear  confessions.    He  was  Royal  confessor  in  1347. 

{Hereford  Episcopal  Reg.,  Bishop  Trilleck,  pp.  92,  104.) 
I35°-I35I-i353-  Gregory  of  St.  Michael.     As    Provincial   presented 
friars  to  hear  confessions. 

{Bath  and  Wells  Epis.  Reg.,  Bishop  Ralph  of  Salop,  ed. 
Somerset    Record    Society,    p.  639 ;    Hereford  Epis.  Reg., 
Bishop  Trilleck,  pp.  19,  20.) 
1356-1361.  John  of  Tattenhall,  D.D.     Appears  as  Provincial  in  these 
years.    He  was  Bishop  of  Ossory,  1361-66. 

{Hereford  Epis.  Reg.,  Charlton,  p.  61 ;  Calend.  of  Papal 
Petitions,  i,  370;  Burgo.  Hib.  D0711.) 
1364.  Robert  Pynke,  D.D.,  was  of  convent  of  Warwick  and  con- 
fessor of  Katherine,  wife  of  Thomas,  Earl  of  Warwick,  in 
1361.  (Reg.  of  Bishop  Stretton  of  Cov.  and  Lich.,  Salt 
Collections,  vol.  viii,  New  Sen,  p.  15).  Was  mentioned  as 
Provincial  in  a  letter  from  the  Mayor  of  London  to  Pope 
Urban  V  in  1364. 

(Palmer,    quoting    from    Muniments    of  the    Guildhall, 
MSS.  P.  iii  B.  6856,  A.  266;  Sharpe,  Wills,  ii,  36.) 
?-i37o.    William    de     Bodelcisham,    D.D.,1   presumably    succeeded 
Pynke,  for  he  was  absolved  from  office  in  1370  by  chapter 
of  Valencia. 

{Acta,  ii,  416;  Patent  Roll,  44  Edw.  Ill,  p.  1,  m.  14  d.) 
1370.    William  A  ndrezc,  D.D.,  was  appointed  Vicar-General  by  the 
chapter  of  Valencia,  1370.     In  1374  ne  became   Bishop  of 
Achonry,  and  of  Meath  in  1380.    He  died  Sept.  28,  1385. 
{Acta,  ii,  416;  Palmer,  Guildford  Obits,  p.  13.) 
1373.  Nicholas  de  Monington,  D.D.,  appears  as  Provincial  in  Sept. 
1373  and  March  1373-4. 
(P.R.  Office,  Chancery  Warrants,  file  1751,  5  and  6.) 
c.  1374-8.   Thomas  Rushook,  D.D.,  formerly  Prior  of  the  convent  of 
Hereford,  appears  as   Provincial  in    1374.    In  1378  he  was 
removed  by  the  Master-General. 
{Acta,  ii,  450-2;  Palmer,  pp.  21-3.) 
1378.  John   Paris,  John  Empsay,    Thomas    Nortebe,   and    William 
Siivard,    all  Doctors   in  Divinity,   were   appointed   Vicars 
successively  on  the   removal   of  Rushook   from  the    Pro- 
vincialship. 

{Cal.  of  Entries  in  Papal  Registers,  v,  14;  Acta  ,  ii,  450-2.) 
1379-82.  Thomas  Rushook,  D.D.,  was  reinstated  in  office  by  Pope 
Urban  VI  in  1379.  He  resigned  in  1382  in  order  to  accept 
the  Archdeaconry  of  St.  Asaph.  He  became  successively 
Bishop  of  Llandaff  1383  and  of  Chichester  1385.  In  1388  he 
was  impeached  for  high  treason  by  the  Parliament  and 
exiled  to  Ireland.  He  became  Bishop  of  Kilmore,  and  died 
about  1390.    He  was  buried  at  Seal  in  Kent. 

{Cal.  of  Papal  Reg.,  ibid. ;  Diet,  of  Nat.  Biogr.,  s.v.) 

1  Will,  de  Bodekisham  is  identical  with  W.  de  Bottisham,  Bishop  of 
Nantes,  Llandaff,  Rochester.  Appears  as  Provincial  in  1368.  {Hereford 
Episc.  Reg.,  Charlton,  p.  47.) 


222  ube  English  Dominicans 

1383-93.  William  Siward,  D.D.,  one  of  the  Vicars  appointed  in  1378, 
was  elected  Provincial  in  1383.  He  was  released  from  office 
by  the  Master-General  in  1393.  He  was  confessor  to 
Edward  III,  and  was  living  in  1396. 

(Palmer,   p.  24,   "Ex  tab.  Mag.  Gen.";  Patent  Roll,  50 
Edw.  Ill,  par.  2,  m.  11.) 
1393.  Robert  Humbleton,  D.D.,  was  appointed  Vicar-General  by  the 
Master-General,  1393. 

(Palmer,  p.  24,  "  Ex  tab.  Mag.  Gen.") 
1393-6.  Thomas  Palmer,  D.D.    Elected  in  1393.    Absolved  from  office 
by  the  Master-General  in  1396.    Living  in  1412. 

(Palmer,    p.   25,    "Ex  tab.    Mag.   Gen.";    Diet  of  Nat. 
Biogr.,  s.v.) 
1396-7.    William  Bagthorpe,   D.D.,  Prior  of  Lynn,   was  appointed 
Vicar-General  by  the  Master  in  1396,  till  the  election  of  the 
new  Provincial. 

(Palmer,  p.  25,  "  Ex  tab.  Mag.  Ord.") 
1397.    William    Pikworth,     D.D.     Elected    at    Newcastle-on-Tyne, 
Aug.  15,  1397.    He  was  still  Provincial  in  1403. 

(Palmer,  p.  26,  "Ex  tab.  Mag.  Gen.";  Bullarium  Ord. 
Praed.,  ii,  367;  Rot.  Parliam.,  iii,  502.) 
1399.  John  Title,  D.D.  Confessor  to  Henry  IV.  Appears  as  Pro- 
vincial in  P.R.O.  Chancery  Miscell.,  bundle  19,  file  4,  no.  11, 
apparently  in  1399. 
c.  14 10.  John  of  Lancaster?  D.D.,  is  mentioned  as  Provincial  in 
Aug.  1410. 

(Palmer,  p.  26,  quoting  Reg.  Edm.  Stafford,  Episc.  Exon., 
i,  101.) 
1422.   Thomas    Waiyn.    Confessor  to  Henry  V.  Mentioned  as  Pro- 
vincial on  Jan.  22,  1422. 

(Brit.  Mus.,  Stowe  Charters,  No.  605.) 
c.  1422.  John  of  Redesdale,  D.D.,  is  mentioned  as  Provincial  Feb.  7, 
1422,  when  he  admitted  Richard  of  Burton,  Prior  of  the 
Charterhouse  of  Beauvale,  Notts,  to  the  graces  of  the  Order. 
(Palmer,  MSS.,  v,  5204,  quoting  Court  of  Augmentations, 
Cart.  B.  96,  now  in  the  Public  Record  Office.) 
1427.  John  Rokill,   D.D.     Appointed  Vicar-General  by  the  Master- 
General  in   1427,  and  elected  Provincial  the  same  or  the 
following  year.  Living  in  1448,  when  he  was  Prior  of  London. 
(Palmer,  p.  27,  "  Ex  tab.  Mag.  Gen.";    Issue  Roll,  Mich. 
27  Hen.  VI,  m.  7.) 
c.  14^8.  Philip  Boydon,  D.D.,  as  Provincial  attended  the  convocation 
of  prelates  at  S.  Paul's  in  April  1438. 
(Wilkins,  Concilia,  iii,  530.) 
e.  1459.    Walter  Wynhale,   D.D.,  attended  as  Provincial  the  General 
Chapter  of  Nimeguen,  1459.    He  had  been  Prior  of  Oxford 
in  1427. 

(Acta,  iii,  268;  Munim.  Academ.  Oxon.,  Rolls  Sen,  p.  570.) 
1462.  John.     Appears  as  Provincial,  1462. 

(Brit.  Mus.  Add.  Charters,  1713  b.) 

1  John  Paris,  D.D.,  constituted  Vicar-General  in  1378,  was  continued 
in  office  during  the  Great  Schism  by  the  Master-General  of  the  Avignon 
Obedience;  and  in  1388  the  same  General  declared  John  of  Lan- 
caster, D.  D. ,  to  be  the  true  English  Provincial.  The  English  Dominicans 
as  a  body  adhered  to  the  Roman  Pontiff,  and  Paris  and  Lancaster  both 
submitted  (Acta,  ii,  3,  40). 


BppenMi*  3-  223 

c.  1465-73.   William  Edmundson,  D.D.,  was  Provincial  about   1465. 
He  ceased  from  office  in  1473,  and  died  before  1478. 

(Palmer,  p.  28,  quoting-  Issue  Roll,  Pasch.,  6  Edw.  IV, 
m.  2;  Acta,  iii,  268.) 
1473-83.  John  Pain,  D.D.  Elected  in  1473.  Appointed  Bishop  of 
Meath  in  1383.  He  was  Master  of  the  Rolls  in  Ireland,  and 
died  May  6,  1506.  Buried  in  the  Dominican  convent  of 
St.  Saviour,  Dublin. 

(Palmer,  p. 29,  "Ex tab.  Mag.  Gen.";  Bull.  O. Praed.,  iii, 
648;  Diet,  of  Nat.  Biogr.,  s.v.) 
1483-95.    William  Richford,  D.D.     Elected  in  1483.     Implicated  in 
Stanley's  conspiracy  and  condemned  to  death,  but  pardoned 
1495.    He  died  in  1501. 

(Palmer,  p.  29,    "  Ex  tab.  Mag.  Gen.";  Guildford  Obits, 
p.  15;  Baker's  Chronicle,  ed.  Philips,  1660,  p.  242  ;  Acta,  iii, 
374.) 
1495-1501.    William  Beetk,  D.D.    Succeeded   Richford  in  1495,  and 
ruled  the  Province  till  1501. 

(Palmer,   pp.   29,    30,     "Ex    tab.    Mag.   Gen.";    Dodd's 
Church  History,  ed.  Brussels,  1737,  i,  234.) 
1501-5.  Nicholas  Stremer,  D.D.    Instituted  Provincial  by  the  Master- 
General,  June  2,  1501. 
(Guildford  Obits,  p.  15.) 
1505.  Robert  Felmingham,  D.D.     Elected  in  1505. 

(Palmer,  p.  30,  "  Ex  tab.  Mag.  Ord.") 
1521-2.  John,  Prior  of  the  Dominican  Order  ;  admitted  B.D.,  Oxon., 
Feb.  6. 
(Reg.  Oxon.,  1,  123,  ed.  Boase,  1885.) 
c.  1527.  Robert  Miles,  D.D.,    Prior  of  King's  Langley,  was  at  the 
same  time  Provincial.    He  is  mentioned  as  such  in  1522  and 
1527.   A  book  of  prayers  or  Collectarium  is  still  preserved 
which  bears  his  name  as  Provincial  at  Woodchester  Priory, 
Gloucestershire. 

(Palmer,  p.  30,  "  Ex  tab.  Mag.  Gen.") 
1527-34.  John    Hodgkin,     D.D.      Elected     in     1527.      Deposed    by 
Henry  VIII  in  1534,  but  reinstated  1536.1    He  was   conse- 
crated Suffragan  Bishop  of  Bedford  in   1537,  and  lived  till 
1560. 

(Palmer,  pp.  30-3,  "  Ex  tab.  Mag.  Gen.";  Stubbs,  Registr. 
Sacr.  Angh,  ed.  1897,  p.  101.) 
1555-8.  William  Perin,  D.D.,  was  appointed  Vicar-General  in  1555, 
and  also  Prior  of  the  Dominicans  who  were  established  by 
Queen  Mary  in  St.  Bartholomew's  in  Smithfield.  Died 
Aug.  22,  1558,  and  buried  in  the  church. 

(Palmer,  Blackfriars  of  London,  Merry  England,  Sept. 
1889,  p.  360;  Diet,  of  Nat.  Biogr.,  s.v.) 
1558-66.  Richard  Hargrave,  D.D.,  succeeded  Perin  in  1558,  but  was 
driven  into  exile  under  Elizabeth.     He  died  in  Flanders, 
1566. 

(Palmer,  Merry  England,  1889,  pp.  361-3.) 
c.  1579.  Thomas  Heskins,    D.D.,    appears    as   Vicar-General   about 

1  John  Hilsey,  D.  D.,  Prior  of  Bristol,  and  later  Bishop  of  Rochester, 
was  appointed  by  Henry  VIII  in  1534;  but  as  this  was  not  confirmed  by 
the  Master-General,  he  cannot,  according-  to  the  laws  of  the  Order,  be 
considered  true  Provincial  (Letters  and  Papers,  Foreign  and  Domestic, 
Henry  VIII,  vol.  vii,  no.  530;  Diet,  of  Nat.  Biogr.,  s.v.). 


224  XTbe  Bnglfsb  Dominicans 

1579,  for  Fulke,  in  reply  to  Heskins's  Parliament  of  Christ, 

calls  him  Provincial  or  General  of  the  English  Dominicans. 

(Fulke,  Heskins's  Parliament  repealed,  p.  393,  ed.    1579  ; 

Diet,  of  Nat.  Biogr.,  s.v.) 

It  is  not  certain  that   there   were  any  Vicars  between  the  death  of 

Heskins  and  1622. 
1622-55.   Thomas  Middleton,  alias  Dade,  B.D.,  was  appointed  Vicar- 
General  in  1622.     He  resigned  in  1655.    For  many  years  he 
was  a  prisoner  for  the  Faith,  first  in  the  Clink  and  then  in 
Newgate.    Died  in  London,  May  18,  1662. 

(Palmer,  Obituary  of  the  English  Dominicans,  ed.  1884, 
p.  2.) 
1655-61.  George  Catchmay,  D.D.    Appointed  Vicar-General,  Nov.  13, 
1655,  anc*  resigned  in  1661.    Died  at  Bornhem  in  Flanders, 
July  12,  1669. 

(Palmer,  ibid.,  p.  2.) 
1661-75.  Philip  Thomas  Howard,  D.D.  Appointed  in  1661.  Created 
Cardinal  Priest,  May  27,  1675.  Cardinal  Protector  of 
England  and  Scotland,  1684.  Died  at  Rome,  June  17, 
1694,  and  buried  in  his  titular  church,  S.  Maria  sopra 
Minerva. 

(Palmer,  Life  of  Cardinal  Howard,  ed.  1868.) 
1675-87.    Vincent  Torre,  D.D.    Appointed  Vicar-General  in  1675.    In 
1685   appointed    Provincial.     Died    in   office  at    Bornhem, 
Aug.  24,  1687.    His  successors  held  the  title  of  Provincial. 
(Palmer,  Obit.,  p.  4.) 
1687-8.  Dominic  Gu-illim  (or  Williams),  B.D.    Appointed  1687.  Died 
Sept.  11,  1688. 
(Palmer,  ibid.) 
1688-94.   Thomas   White,  D.D.     Appointed   Nov.  13,    1688.    Died  in 
office  at  Rome,  Nov.  19,  1694. 
(Palmer,  ibid., -p.  5.) 
1694-5.    William  Collins,  D.D.    Vicar-General  from  Dec.  to  March. 

(Palmer,  ibid.,  p.  6.) 
1695-7.  Edward  Bing,  Preacher-General.1  Appointed  March  8,  1695. 
Resigned  1697.    Died  at  Bornhem,  Sept.  25,  1701. 
(Palmer,  ibid.,  p.  7.) 
1698-1708.  Ambrose  Grymes  or    Graham,    D.D.     Appointed   Vicar- 
General    1698   and    Provincial    1700.'2    Reappointed  1704-8. 
Died  at  Louvain,  Feb.  18,  1719. 
(Palmer,  ibid.,  p.  9.) 
1708-12.   Thomas    Worthington,    Lector  in    Sacred   Theology.     Ap- 
pointed 1708.     Retired  from  office  in  1712.    He  served  three 
more  terms  as  Provincial. 
171 2-16.   Thomas  Dominic    Williams,   Lector  in  S.   Theology.     Ap- 
pointed Feb.  28,  1712. 
1716-21.  Raymund  Greene,  D.D.     Appointed  April  2,  1716,  and  held 
office  till  1721.     Died  at  Louvain,  July  28,  1741. 
(Palmer,  ibid.,  p.  12.) 
1 72 1-5.  Joseph  Hansbie,  Lector  in  S.  Theology.    Appointed  June  20, 


1  Preacher-General  is  a  title  conferred  on  those  who  have  distinguished 
themselves  in  preaching.    It  dates  from  the  thirteenth  century. 

2  The  Provincials  who  succeeded  Vincent  Torre  were  appointed  for  a 
term  of  four  years,  for  this  was  now  the  law  in  the  Order. 


Bppenfeis  3  225 

1725.  Thomas  Dominic  Williams,  D.D.  Appointed  a  second  time, 
July  12,  1725.  Consecrated  Bishop  of  Tiberiopolis  by  Pope 
Benedict  XIII,  O.P.,  Dec.  30.  Nominated  Vicar  Apostolic 
of  northern  district  of  England,  June  7,  1727.  Died  April  3, 
1740,  and  buried  at  Hazelwood,  Yorks. 

(Palmer,    "A  consecrated  life,"  from  MS.  of  Fr.  Thomas 
Worthington,  in  Merry  England,  Nov.  and  Dec.  1887;  Diet. 
of  Nat.  Biogr.,  s.v.) 
1726-30.    Thomas  Worthington,  D.D.     Reappointed  Jan.  4,  1726. 
1730-4.  Ambrose  Burgis,  D.D.    Elected  Provincial  by  the  Chapter  of 
the  Province  assembled  at  London,  April  23,  1730.    Hitherto 
the  appointment  had  lain  with  the  Master-General. 
1734-8.  Joseph  Hansbie,  D.D.   Elected  for  a  second  term,  May  4,  1734. 
1738-42.  Albert  Lovett,  Preacher-General.      Elected  April   24,   1738. 
Retired  from  office  March  17,  1742,  and  died  at  London, 
June  1. 

(Palmer,  Obit.,  pp.  12,  13.) 
1742-6.   Thomas  Worthington,  D.D.    Elected  for  a  third  term,  May  10, 

1742. 
1746-7.  Ambrose  Burgis,   D.D.     Appointed  Vicar-General   in    1746. 
Died  in  office,  April  27,  1747. 
(Palmer,  Obit.,  p.  13.) 
1747-8.  Andrew  Wynter,  Preacher-General.  Appointed  Vicar-General 
1747  till  the  election  of  a  Provincial  the  following  year.  Died 
at  Louvain,  March  19,  1754. 
(Palmer,  Obit.,  p.  15.) 
1748-50.  Joseph  Hansbie,   D.D.     Elected  for  a  third  term,  April  6, 
1848.    Died  in  office  at  London,  June  5,  1750. 
(Palmer,  Obit.,  pp.  13,  14.) 
1750.  John  Clarkson,  D.D.    Appointed  Vicar-General  July  25,  1750. 
1750-4.  Thomas    Worthington,   D.D.     Elected  for  a  fourth  term  as 
Provincial,  Sept.  26,  1750.     Died  in  office,  Feb.  25,  1754. 
(Palmer,  Obit.,  pp.  14,  15.) 
1754.  John  Clarkson,  D.D.    Appointed  Vicar-General  a  second  time, 

April  6,  1754. 
1754-8.  Antoninus  Hatton.     Elected  Provincial  May  21,  1754. 
1758-62.  John   Clarkson,    D.D.      Elected    May    5,    1758.      Died    at 
Brussels,  March  26,  1763. 
(Palmer,  Obit.,  p.  17.) 
1762-5.  Stephen  Catterell,  Preacher-General.     Elected  May  5,  1762. 
Died  in  office  at  Stonecroft,  Northumberland,  Dec.  25,  1765. 
(Palmer,  Obit.,  p.  17.) 
1766.1  Benedict  Short.    Elected  April  26,  1766. 

1770.  Antoninus  Hatton,  D.D.    Elected  for  a  second  term,  May  7, 
1770.     Died  at  Stourton,  Yorks,  Oct.  23,  1783. 
(Palmer,  Obit.,  p.  18.) 
1774.  Joseph  Edwards,  alias  Tylecote,  D.D.    Elected  April  25,  1774. 
Died  at  Hinckley,  Leicestershire,  Sept.  4,  1781. 
(Palmer,  Obit.,  p.  18.) 
1778.  Benedict  Short,  D.D.     Elected   May    12,    1778,  for  the  second 

time. 
1782.  Peter  Robson,  B.D.    Elected  April  24,  1782     Died  Feb.  4,  1788. 

(Palmer,  Obit.,  p.  19.) 
1786.  Benedict  Short,  D.D.    Elected  a  third  time,  May  10,  1786. 

1  In  the  remainder  of  this  list,  as  the  dates  are  continuous,  the  year  of 
election  only  is  given. 


226  Hbe  Engltsb  H>ominicans 

1790.  Raymund  Bullock,  Lector  in  S.  Theology.     Elected  April  26 

"1790. 
1794.  Benedict  Short,  D.D.    Elected  for  a  fourth  term,  May  13,  1794. 
Died  May  13,  1800. 

(Palmer,  Obit.,  pp.  20,  21.) 
1798.  Raymund  Bullock,   D.D.    Elected  for  a  second  time,  May  1, 
1798.     Diedjune  25,  1819. 
(Palmer,  Obit.,  pp.  23,  24.) 
1802.  Anthony  Plunhett,  alias  Underhill,  D.D.     Elected  May  8,  1802. 
Died  at  York,  Jan.  19,  1810. 
(Palmer,  Obit.,  p.  22.) 
1806.  Pius  Potier,  D.D.    Elected  April  13,  1806.     Re-elected  April  13, 

1808. 
1810.  Francis  Xavier  Chappell,  D.D.    Elected  May   14,  1810.     Died 
at  Bornhem,  March  24,  1825. 
(Palmer,  Obit.,  p.  24.) 
1814.  Lewis  Brittain,  D.D.    Elected  May  3,  1814.    Died  at  Hartbury 
Court,  Gloucester,  May  3,  1827. 
(Palmer,  Obit.,  p.  25.) 
1818.  Pius  Potier,  D.D.    Elected  for  third  time,  April  13,  1818.    Died 
at  Hinckley,  Nov.  18,  1846. 
(Palmer,  Obit.,  p.  27.) 
1822.  Ambrose  Woods,    D.D.    Elected  Provincial  April  30,  1822.    Ap- 
pointed Vicar-General  May  17,  1826.    Re-elected  Provincial, 
May  4,  1830.    Died  at  Hinckley,  Nov.  26,  1842. 
(Palmer,  Obit,  p.  26.) 
1834.  Augustine  Procter.    Elected  April  22,  1834.    Re-elected  Sept.  4, 

1838. 
1842.   Thomas  Nicholds,  Lector  in  S.  Theology.     Elected  1838. 
1846.  Augustine  Procter,  Preacher-General.  Elected  for  a  third  term 

May  4,  1846. 
1850.  Dominic  Ayhvard.    Appointed  July  20,  1850. 
1854.   Thomas  JVickolds,P.G.,  Lector  in  S.  Theology.    Re-elected  1854. 
1858.  Augustine  Procter,  P.G.    Elected  a  fourth  time,  April  28,  1858. 
I3ied  Jan.  8,  1867.    Buried  at  Woodchester,  Gloucestershire. 
(Palmer,  Obit.,  pp.  28,  29.) 
1862.   Thomas  Nicholds,  D.D.,  P.G.     Elected  for  a  third  term,  1866. 
Died  at  London,  May  22,  1889.  Buried  at  Woodchester. 
(Acta  Cap.  Prov.) 
1866.  Dominic  Aylward,   D.D.     Re-elected  July  4,    1866.     Died  at 
Hinckley,  Oct.  5,  1872.    Buried  at  Woodchester. 
(Palmer,  Obit.,  p.  30.) 
1870.    Vincent  King,  D.D.    Elected  1870.    Re-elected  1874  and  1878. 
Appointed  Bishop  of  Juliopolis  and  Coadjutor  of  the  Arch- 
bishop of  Trinidad    1885.    Died   Feb.  26,  1886,  at  Louvain. 
Buried  at  Woodchester. 
(Acta  Cap.  Prov.) 
1882.  Antoninus    Williams.    Elected  June    19,   1882.    Died  April  9, 
1901.     Buried  at  Woodchester. 
(Acta  Cap.  Prov.) 
1886.  Gregory    Kelly,    D.D.      Elected     May     18,    1886.      Re-elected 
April  29,  1890.      Died   at  Hinckley,  April   10,  1913.    Buried 
at  Hawkesyard  Priory,  Staffs. 
(Acta  Cap.  Prov.) 
1894.  John  Procter,  Lector  in    S.  Theology.      Elected  April  17,  1S94. 
Re-elected  June  21,  1898. 


appends  3  227 

1902.  Lawrence  Shapcote,  Lector  in  S.  Theology.     Elected  April  22, 
1902.    Re-elected  May  8,  1906.    Resigned  1907. 
(Acta  Cap.  Prov.) 
1907.  John  Procter,  D.D.    Elected  a  third  time,  Nov.  26,  1907.    Died 
in  office  at  London,  Oct.  1,  191 1.     Buried  at  Woodchester. 
(Acta  Cap.  Prov.) 
1911.  Humbert  Everest,  D.D.    Elected  Nov.  8,  191 1. 

(Acta  Cap.  Prov.) 
1916.  Bede  Jarrett,  M.A.,  Lector  in  S.  Theology.    Elected  Sept.  5, 
1916. 

N.B.  This  list  has  been  compiled  by  the  Rev.  Walter  Gumbley,  O.  P. 


APPENDIX  II 


ENGLISH  DOMINICAN  PRO- 
VINCIAL CHAPTERS  OF  WHICH 
RECORD  HAS  BEEN  FOUND  x 


1230 

1235 
1238 
1239 
1240 
1241 
1242 
1244 
1246 
1247 
1250 

!255 


1256 

1257 

1258 

1259 

1261 

1263 

1266 
1271 
1272 

1274 

1276 

1277 

1280 
1284 

1286 

1289 
1290 

1293 
1297 

1298 

1299 

1300 

1302 
1303 

J304 
1305 
1306 
1307 
1309 
1310 
1311 


Oxford. 

York. 

Lincoln. 

Northampton. 

Beverley. 

Oxford. 

Winchester. 

Lincoln. 

York. 

Stamford. 

Holborn  (Gen.  Chap.). 

(Mentioned  in  royal  ac- 
counts without  name  of 
place  held.) 

York. 

Gloucester. 

Oxford. 

Winchester. 

Stamford. 

Holborn  (Gen.  Chap.). 


Northampton. 
Northampton. 
York. 
Stamford. 
London. 

Oxford  (Gen.  Chap.). 
Northampton   and    Glou- 
cester. 
Beverley. 
York. 
Oxford. 
Lincoln. 
Oxford. 
Salisbury. 
Shrewsbury. 
Lincoln. 
Bristol. 
Pontefract. 
Lynn. 
Oxford. 
York. 
London. 
Cambridge. 
Derby. 
Gloucester. 


312  Chester. 

313  Northampton. 

314  London  (Gen.  Chap.). 

315  Winchester. 

316  Sudbury. 

317  Leicester. 

318  Oxford. 

319  Salisbury. 

320  Stamford. 

321  Pontefract. 

322  Warwick. 

323  Bristol. 

324  Cambridge. 

325  Lincoln. 

326  Oxford. 

327  London. 

328  London. 

329  York. 

330  Oxford. 

332  Dunstable. 

333  Gloucester. 

334  Leicester. 

335  London  (Gen.  Chap.). 

336  Cambridge. 

337  Warwick. 

338  — 

339  Winchester. 

340  London. 

341  Warwick. 

342  Beverley  and  Stamford. 

343  Bristol. 

344  Lynn- 

345  Shrewsbury. 

346  Derby. 

347  Cambridge. 

357  

359  London. 

361  Northampton. 

364  

365  Lynn. 

366  Cambridge. 

367  Warwick. 

368  Sudbury. 

369  London. 

370  Stamford. 
376  Derby. 


1  The  chief  sources  of  information  are  the  royal  accounts  of  the  King's 
almsgiving. 

228 


1384 
1385 

i386 
-'387 
1389 
1390 

i39i 
1392 

1393 
1394 
1395 
1397 
1398 
1399 
1400 

1403 
1404 
1406 
1408 
1409 
HJ3 


M23 
i425 
1426 
1427 
1428 
1429 
1430 
H31 
i432 
1434 
H35 
1436 
1437 
H38 
1439 
1440 
1442 
H43 
1445 
1446 

*447 
1448 
1449 
145 ! 
i452 
1453 
1454 
1455 
1458 
1459 
1462 
1464 
1466 


467 
468 
469 
471 
477 
479 
484 
486 


229 


Canterbury. 


Newcastle-on-Tyne. 


London. 


(Grants  of  ^,20  for  Prov. 

Chap,  renewed  for  new 

reign.) 
Ditto. 


Cambridge. 
Oxford. 


Newcastle-under-Lyme. 


(Confirmation  of  old  grant 
in  new  reign.) 


507 
5'o 
73o 
734 

738 
742 

75o 
754 
758 
762 
766 
770 

774 

778 
782 
786 
790 

794 
798 
802 
806 
810 
814 
818 
S22 
826 
830 

834 
838 
842 
846 
850 

854 
858 
862 
866 
870 

874 
878 
880 
882 
884 


890 
892 


(Confirmation  of  grant.) 
London. 
London. 
London. 
London. 
London. 
London. 
London. 
Bornhem. 
London. 
London. 
London. 
London. 
London. 
London. 
London. 
Woburn. 
Woburn. 
London. 
London. 
Carshalton. 
Leicester. 
Hinckley. 
Hinckley. 
Hinckley. 
Hinckley. 
Hinckley- 
&  1839     Hinckley. 
Hinckley. 
Hinckley. 
Hinckley. 
Hinckley. 
Woodchester. 
Woodchester. 
Woodchester. 
Woodchester. 
London  (S.  Dominic's). 
Woodchester. 
London  (Intermediate). 
London. 

London  (Intermediate). 
Woodchester. ' 
Woodchester    (Intermedi- 
ate). 
London. 
London  (Intermediate). 


230  XTbe  j&nglteb 

1894     Woodchester. 

1896  Newcastle-on-Tyne  (Inter- 
mediate). 

1898     London. 

1900  Woodchester  (Intermedi- 
ate). 

1902     Hawkesyard 

1904     Pendleton  (Intermediate). 


IDominicans 

1906  London. 

1908  London. 

1910  Pendleton  (Intermediate). 

1912  London. 

1914  Leicester  (Intermediate). 

1916  Woodchester. 

1918  Newcastle  (Intermediate) 

1920  Hawkesyard 


APPENDIX  III 

PRE-REFORMATION  PRIORIES, 
WITH  REFERENCES  TO  ART- 
ICLES, ETC. 

Arundel.     Sussex  Archaeological  Collection,  xxviii  (1878). 

Bamborough.     Reliquary,  xx,  Jan  (1880). 

Bangor.     Reliquary,  xxiv,  April  (1884). 

Beverley.     Yorkshire  Archaeological  Journal,  vii  (1882). 

Boston.     Reliquary,  xxii,  Oct.  (1881). 

Brecknock.     Reliquary,  xxiv,  Jan.  (1884). 

Bristol.     Reliquary,  New  Series,  ii,  April  (1888). 

Cambridge.     Reliquary,  xxv,  Jan. -April  (1885). 

Canterbury.     Archaeologia  Cantiana,  vii  (1879). 

Cardiff.     Reliquary,  xxiv,  Jan.  (1884). 

Carlisle.     Reliquary,  xxi,  April  (1881). 

Chelmsford.     Reliquary,  New  Series,  iii,  July  (1889). 

Chester.     Reliquary,  xxiii,  Oct.  (1882). 

Chichester.     Sussex  Archaeological  Collection,  xxix  (1879). 

Dartford.     Archaeological  Journal,  xxxv,  1878;  xxxix  (1882). 

Derby.     Reliquary,  xviii,  July  (1877). 

Dunstable.     Reliquary,  xxii,  July  (1881). 

Dunwich.     Reliquary,  xxvi,  April  (1886). 

Exeter.      Reliquary,  xxvi,  July-Oct.  (1886). 

Gloucester.     Archaeological  Journal,  xxxiv  (1882). 

Guildford.     Reliquary,  New  Series,  i,  Jan.  (1887). 

Haverfordwest.     Reliquary,  xxiv,  July  (1883). 

Hereford.      Reliquary,  xxiii,  July  (1882). 

Ilchester.     Reliquary,  xxv,  Oct.  (1884). 

Ipswich.     Reliquary,  New  Series,  i,  April  (1887). 

King's  Langley.     Reliquary,  xix,  July-Oct.  1878;  April  (1879). 

Lancaster.     Reliquary,  xxvi,  July  (1885). 

Leicester.     Transactions  of  Leicester  Architectural  and  Archaeological 

Society  (1884). 
Lincoln.     Reliquary,  xxv,  July  (1884). 
London,  (a)  Holborn.     Reliquary,   xvii,  July-Oct.  1876.    (b)  Ludgate. 

Merry  England,  April-Sept.  (1889). 
Lynn  Regis.     Archaeological  Journal,  xli  (1884). 
Melcombe  Regis.     Reliquary,  xxi,  Oct.  (1880). 
Newcastle-on-Tyne.     Reliquary,  xviii,  Oct.  (1877);  Jan.  (1878). 
Newcastle-under-Lyme.     Reliquary,  xvii,  Jan.  (1876). 
Norwich.     Reliquary,  New  Series,  ii-iii,  July-Oct.  (1888);  Jan.-April 

(1889). 
Northampton.     Reliquary,  xxi,  July  (1880). 
Oxford.     Reliquary,  xxiii,  Jan.-April  (1883). 
Pontefract.     Reliquary,  xx,  Oct.  (1879). 
Rhuddlan.     Reliquary,  xxvi,  Jan.  (1886). 
Salisbury.     Wilts  Archaeological  and    Natural   History  Magazine, 

xviii,  April  (1879). 
Scarborough.     Reliquary,  xx,  April  (1880). 
Shrewsbury.     Reliquary,  xxvi,  Oct.  1885;  Shropshire  Archaeological 

Society  Transactions,  ix,  251,  266  (if 
Stamford.     Reliquary,  xxi,  Jan.  (1881). 
Sudbury.     Reliquary,  xxiv,  Oct.  (1883). 

231 


232  ZTbe  JEitQlisb  Dominicans 

Thetford.     Reliquary,  New  Series,  iii,  Oct.  (1887). 

Truro.     Reliquary,  New  Series,  ii,  Jan.  (1888). 

Wajwick.    Transactions  of  Birmingham  and  Midland  Institute(i88o). 

Wilton.     Wilts  Archaeological  and  Natural  History  Magazine,  April 

(1879)- 
Winchester.     Reliquary,  New  Series,  iii,  Oct.  (1889). 
Worcester.     Reliquary,  xx,  July  (1879). 
Yar?n.     Archaeological  Journal,  xxxvii  (1880). 
Yarmouth.     Reliquary,  New  Series,  i,  July  (1887). 
York.     Yorkshire  Archaeological  Journal,  vi  (1881). 


INDEX 


AMBASSADORS,  Dominicans 
as  royal,  74,  m-117,  121,  175. 

Anchorites  and  Anchoresses,  12, 
27,  51,  83,  168,  21 1. 

Apostates,  Dominican  turns  Jew, 
100;  from  the  Order,  121,  122, 
132-136;  during  the  Reforma- 
tion, 157,  162-167,  176. 

Aquinas,  Saint  Thomas,  quoted, 
17,  45,  67,  68,  75;  his  teaching- 
opposed,  68-75,  215;  his  works 
translated  into  Armenian,  102. 

Aristotelian  Philosophy,  followed 
by  Saint  Thomas  and  the  Do- 
minicans, 17,  56,  67;  attacked, 
62,  64,  67,  68,  215;  it  conquers 
at  Oxford,  75. 

Artists,  Dominican,  94,  105. 

Augustine,  Rule  of  St.,  read  in 
Dominican  refectories,  35 ;  a  fol- 
lower of  Plato,  67. 

BACON,  Robert,  preaches 
against  foreign  influence  at 
Court,  92 ;  thought  to  be  the 
author  of  the  Ancren  Rhvle,  94. 

Bartholomew,  Friar,  natural  son 
of  King  John,  22,  130. 

Bartholomew's,  St.,  Smithfield, 
Dominican  Priory  of,  169,  170, 
173,  181. 

Benedictines,  unfavourable  to  the 
Friars,  15;  of  Canterbury  re- 
ceived to  the  fellowship  of  the 
Dominican  Order,  16;  become 
Dominicans,  22 ;  at  Oxford,  83 ; 
and  representative  government, 
127. 

Bequests  to  the  Dominicans,  11, 
12,  14,  20,  21,  27-29,  35,  38-41, 
49,  149;  for  burial,  26-31,  34,  48; 
of  royal  chaplains,  1 19-121;  will 
of  Bishop  Ringstead,  92. 

Black  Death,  20,  no,  139,  140, 
148. 

Blessed  Sacrament,  in  Dominican 
churches,  27,  28. 

Books,  in  Dominican  libraries,  39; 
Text-books,  56;  in  the  Middle 
Ages,  63;  devotional,  95,  96. 

Bornhem,  Priory  of,  181-184,  188, 
197,  199-201,  207;  sacked  during 
the  French  Revolution,  196. 

Bridget  Plantagenet,  nun  at  Dart- 
ford,  n,  12,  39. 

Bromyard,  Robert,  Dominican 
Theologian,  48,  61,  66,  88-90, 
105,  220. 

Burke,  Thomas,  O. P.,  202,  205. 


CHAPTERS,  Provincial,  42,  56; 
General,  42,  43,  147,  148;  of 
Faults,  37. 

Charles  II,  182,  188,  190,  191. 

Chaucer,  represents  friars  un- 
favourably, 19,  139;  quoted,  in. 

Claypole,  Richard,  O.  P.,  105;  his 
book  attacked  by  Archbishop 
Peckham,  72,  73;  his  end,  74,  75. 

Concordance,  drawn  up  by  English 
Dominicans,  63. 

Confessors  and  Chaplains,  royal, 
10,  62,  74,  92,  95,  106  et  seq.,  167, 
170,  171,  183,  188,  191;  to  the 
nobility,  124,  125. 

Cranmer,  157,  159,  166,  177. 

Cromwell,  Thomas,  9,  n,  156,  162, 
164,  165,  168. 

Crusades,  and  the  Dominicans, 
100,  10 1. 

DARLINGTON,  John  of,  O.P., 
confessor  and  councillor  to 
Henry  III,  63,  99,  109,  in,  114, 
128,  138. 

Dartford.    See  Nuns. 

Decline  of  the  Dominicans  in  Eng- 
land, 23,  82-85,  151,  152. 

Democracy  of  the  Dominicans,  17, 
127,  128,  149. 

Divine  Office,  25,  32,  43,  56,  140, 
145,  204;  said  by  Richard  II  ac- 
cording to  Dominican  Rite,  13, 
118,  140;  choral  recitation  sub- 
ordinate to  friars'  work  of 
preaching  and  study,  15,  47. 

Dominic,  St.,  Founder  of  the 
Friars-Preachers,  1,  44,  65,  86; 
his  system  of  legislation,  1,  126, 
127. 

Dunheved,  Thomas,  O.  P.,  121, 
122. 

EDWARD  I,  friend  and  bene- 
factor of  the  Dominicans,  5,  13, 
74;  the  hero  of  Trivet's  Annals 
of  the  Angevins,  97-99;  Dominican 
Tertiary,  210. 

Edward  II,  his  generosity  and  de- 
votion to  the  Dominican  Order, 
5,  9,  13,48,  119,  136,  137;  sides 
with  the  Dominicans  in  their 
quarrel  with  the  University  of 
Oxford,  76-79,  81,  82;  his  death, 
114;  supported  by  the  Do- 
minicans, 122;  Dominican  Ter- 
tiary, 210. 

Edward  III,  his  benefactions  to  the 
Dominican  Order,  8,   11,  13,   18, 


233 


2  34  3-nfces 

19,  48,  109;  uses  Dominicans  as 
propagandists  of  royal  policy, 
113;  orders  expulsion  of  foreign 
students  from  Oxford,  141-143. 

Eleanor  of  Castile,  Queen,  her  vow 
to  found  a  house  of  Dominican 
Nuns,  9,  1 1 ;  she  is  affiliated  to 
the  Order,  74,  210. 

Eleanor  of  Provence,  Queen,  97 ; 
foundress  of  the  Priory  of  Guild- 
ford, 9,  151. 

FRANCISCANS,  83,  86,  131, 
209 ;'  their  disputes  with  the 
Dominicans,  16,  68-73;  appointed 
to  preach  the  Crusade,  100;  em- 
ployed with  the  Dominicans  on 
political  affairs  in  the  royal  ser- 
vice,. 113;  executed  with  the 
Maid  of  Kent,  157;  subscribe 
the  royal  supremacy,  157.. 

Fresney,  Gilbert  de,  sent  by  St. 
Dominic  to  found  the  English 
Province,  1,  2,  219. 

Frog-  Lane,  Hereford,  dispute  con- 
cerning, 18,  19. 


GAVESTON,  Piers,  5;  burial 
of,  6-8 ;  Priory  of  King's  Lang- 
ley  raised  by  Edward  II  to  his 
memory,  8,  119. 
Gorham,  Nicholas,  O.P.,  famous 
preacher  and  confessor  to  King 
Philip  of  France,  91,  105,  106. 
Grosseteste,   Bishop,    16,    94,   214, 

Guest-house  of  Dominican  Priories, 
36,  37;  at  Shrewsbury,  Richard, 
Duke  of  York,  born  in,  36,  106, 
136. 


117; 
the 


HABIT,    Dominican,    40, 
attracts    benefactor    to 
Order,  201. 

Hallahan,  Mother  Margaret, 
Foundress  of  Conventual  Third 
Order  of  Dominican  Sisters  in 
England,  211-213,  218. 

Hawkesyard  Priory,  206,  207,  218. 

Henry  III,  King,  his  gifts  to  the 
Dominicans,  4,  12,  35,  47,  65; 
Trivet's  description  of,  97;  em- 
ploys Dominicans  in  political 
affairs,  and  as  foreign  ambas- 
sadors, 109,  1 1 1 -1 14. 

Henry  IV,  King,  his  relations  with 
the  Dominicans,  13,  146,  147;  his 
last  hours,  150. 

Henry  VIII,  King,  petition  to,  by 
Friars  of  Guildford,  14,  151,  152; 
his    supremacy,     and    marriage 


with  Anne  Boleyn  acknowledged, 
157;  opposed  by  Dominicans, 
159-161,  167;  Dominicans  sur- 
render to,  162-169,  l72' 

Hilsey,  John,  Prior  of  Bristol, 
apostate  under  Henry  VIII,  153, 
154,  156-158,  162,  163,  165. 

Hinckley,  Priory  of,  first  house  of 
restored  English  Dominican 
Province,  201,  202,  207,  211. 

Historians,  Dominican,  95-99. 

Holcot,  Robert,         Dominican 

preacher  and  writer,  49,  61,  62, 

95»  i3°- 

Hotham,  William  of,  O.P.,  Pro- 
vincial of  England,  49,  61,  220; 
his  dispute  with  Archbishop 
Peckham,  71-74;  his  friendship 
with  Edward  I  and  Eleanor  of 
Castile,  74 ;  sent  on  a  royal 
embassy,  75,  109 ;  made  Arch- 
bishop of  Dublin,  74,  75. 

Howard,  Philip  (afterwards  Father 
Thomas,  O. P.,  and  then  Card- 
inal), his  birth  and  vocation,  178- 
180 ;  reorganizes  the  English 
Province,  180-182,  184,  216,  217; 
made  confessor  to  Catherine  of 
Braganza,  182,  183,  188;  created 
Cardinal,  189 ;  his  influence  at 
Court,  188,  191 ;  his  death,  190. 

Humbert  de  Romans,  quoted,  44, 
88. 


MMACULATE  Conception,  62. 


J: 


ANDEL,  Pere,  Master-General, 
O. P.,  202,  205,  206,  212. 
Jacobites,  and  the  Dominicans,  99, 

•39- 
jews,  and  the  Dominicans,  99,  139. 


KIL 
Ar 


[LWARDBY,  Robert,  O.P., 
Lrchbishop  of  Canterbury,  and 
afterwards  Cardinal,  5,  49,  100, 
105,  219;  attacks  Thomistic  sys- 
tem, 62,  66,  68-71. 

Kings,  Plantagenet,  their  devotion 
to  the  Dominican  Order,  3-5,  12, 
14,  21,  22,  82,  106,  109,  214,  215. 

King's  Langley,  Priory  of,  5,  8,  31, 
52,  119,  122,  132,  136,  157,  207. 

T   ATIMER,  153,  154,  156. 

1  j  Lisle, Thomas  de,  O. P.,  Bishop 

of  Ely,  122,  124. 
London,    Dominicans    in,    2,    3,   4 ; 
famous  Ludgate  Blackfriars,  5, 
23-  25.  27>  30-37.  39.  42,  48,  51- 


53.    "i>    '39. 
Hill,  205,  206. 


Snfcej:  235 

157;    Haverstock       Prisons,    in     Dominican    Priories, 
41,  81,  133-135,  145. 


MACCLESFIELD,  William  of, 
O.  P. ,  celebrated  professorand 
cardinal,  49,  62,  70. 
Margaret  of  Anjou,  Oueen,  62,  108, 

Margarita  Philosophica,  56. 

Marshall,  Richard,  O.P.,  Prior  of 
Newcastle,  160,  161. 

Medicine,  Science  of,  94,  95. 

Missionary  enterprise,  46,  102-105, 
208,  218;  in  America,  198;  mission 
work  in  England,  192-198,  214. 

Murderers,  intervention  of  Do- 
minicans on  behalf  of,  137-139- 

Music  among  the  Dominicans,  32, 
33)  43>  94>  at  the  school  at  Born- 
hem,  183. 

NEWCASTLE,  present  Priory 
of,  203,  205,  206. 
Norwich,  Priory  of,  3,  25,  27,  29,  33. 
Nure  ,  Dominican,  of  Dartford, 9-12, 
165,  170,  173,  2ii ;  present  com- 
munity founded  by  Cardinal 
Howard,  184-188,  192,  196,  202, 
203,  212;  founded  by  St.  Do- 
minic, 210. 

OXFORD,  Dominican  Priory 
at,  2,  6,  7,  28,  33,  36,  60,  63, 
65,  66,  83-85,  99,  135,  142,  218. 
See  Universities. 

PALMER,  Thomas,  O.P.,  Eng- 
lish Provincial,  145,  146,  222. 

Paris,  Matthew,  quoted,  3,  14,  15, 
16,  22,  25,  45,  46,  90,  92,  99,  101, 
130. 

Parliament,  Mad,  33,  135;  Bishop 
Gilbert  acquitted  by,  124;  Do- 
minican influence  on  European 
Parliaments,  126-128,  171. 

Peckham,  John,  Archbishop  of 
Canterbury,  68-74,  215. 

Pendleton,  Priory  of,  207. 

Philobiblion,  The,  quoted,  39,  50, 
64. 

Piers  Plowman,  quoted,  17,  24,  26, 
64,  149. 

Plato  and  Platonism,  17,  64,  66-68, 

75- 

Poverty,  religious,  5,  16,  136,  137; 
Friars  reduced  to  poverty  at  time 
of  Reformation,  9,  152,  165,  168, 
169. 

Preaching,  44,  51,  65,  82,  86-94; 
leave  for,  14,  17  ;  preaching- 
cross,  26.    See  Sermons. 


RAYMUND,  Blessed,  of  Capua, 
57,  140,  141,  144-147. 

Revolution,  French,  184,  185,  196, 
217,  218. 

Richard,  Saint,  of  Chichester,  39, 
98,  130. 

Richard  II,  and  the  Dominican 
Order,  8,  13,  31,  38,  118,  140, 
146. 

Richard  III,  benefactor  of  Dart- 
ford  Priory,  11. 

Riots,  joined  in  by  Dominicans, 
17,  149;  on  expulsion  of  foreign 
students,  142 ;  .mobbing  of  Do- 
minican Priories,  19,  31,  131,  132, 

!34>  135- 
Rushook,  Thomas,  Bishop,  O. P., 
38,  107,  108,  119,  143,  221. 

SACRILEGE  at  Brussels,  185- 
188. 

Schools,  Grammar,  50-52,  83 ; 
school  at  Bornhem,  182-184,  2I7» 
at  Carshalton,  196-198,  217;  at 
Hinckley,  201,  206,  217;  at 
Hawkesyard,  207,  218;  schools 
opened  by  Dominican  Nuns,  185. 
See  Universities. 

Sermons.  Gilbert  de  Fresney's 
sermon  before  Cardinal  Lang- 
ton,  2,  65,  214;  sermons  by  Do- 
minicans before  English  Kings, 
9,  13,  92;  English  love  of  ser- 
mons, 23 ;  at  the  University  of 
Oxford,  80;  anecdotes  in,  89-91 ; 
Henry  III  and,  97;  sermons  ex- 
citing controversy  during  the 
Reformation,  154-156,  158,  159, 
162,  166.    See  Preaching. 

Stavensby,  Alexander  de,  Bishop, 
2,  3,  16. 

Students,  Dominican,  44,  50,  52-60, 
76,  180;  privileges  granted  to, 
38,  45,  47;  expenses  of,  47-49; 
foreign  students,  48,  141-143, 
146. 

TERTIARIES,  Dominican,  208- 
213;  Tertius  Ordo,  86,  209,  210. 
Trivet,    Nicholas,  O. P.,  historian, 
61,  62,  69,  95-99,  105. 

ULLATHORNE,   Bishop,  211, 
212,  218. 
United  States,  Dominican  Province 

of,  197-200,  217. 
Universities,  the  Dominicans  and, 
2.  4b  5°.  52-55-  59.6i,  63,69,  71, 


336  Snfces 

76>  93.  96,  I71.  215;  University  of       Woodford,    Luke    of,    O.P.,    k. 


Oxford,  dispute  with,   53,  715-82, 
I5I- 

WALLACE,     Thomas,     O.P., 
famous  mediaeval  preacher, 
88,  89,  91,  93,  105. 
Wiseman,  Cardinal,  203-205. 

Woodchester,   Priory   of,  201-206,         I  Royal    Court,"1  ^"""pHor 
212,  213,  217.  executed,  159. 


fessor  to  Edward  III,  79,  Sc 
117,  119. 
Wycliffe,   17,  20,  39,  64,   131. 
149. 


"yORK,  Priory  of,  enterta 


PRINTED  IN  ENGLAND. 


University  of 
Connecticut 

Libraries 


39153029236868 


